12016-01-11T00:03:04  *** jcorgan|away is now known as jcorgan
  22016-01-11T00:04:20  *** Thireus has quit IRC
  32016-01-11T00:05:59  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
  42016-01-11T00:06:22  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  52016-01-11T00:08:38  *** zooko has quit IRC
  62016-01-11T00:08:49  *** AtashiCon has quit IRC
  72016-01-11T00:09:07  *** AtashiCon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  82016-01-11T00:35:42  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  92016-01-11T00:48:21  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
 102016-01-11T01:23:25  *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 112016-01-11T01:29:28  *** d_t_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 122016-01-11T01:29:36  *** d_t has quit IRC
 132016-01-11T01:30:37  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 142016-01-11T01:34:02  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 152016-01-11T01:34:37  *** brg444 has quit IRC
 162016-01-11T01:34:58  *** d_t_ has quit IRC
 172016-01-11T01:51:27  *** d_t has quit IRC
 182016-01-11T01:52:06  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 192016-01-11T01:54:47  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 202016-01-11T02:05:36  *** d_t_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 212016-01-11T02:05:47  *** d_t has quit IRC
 222016-01-11T02:06:01  *** d_t_ has quit IRC
 232016-01-11T02:06:32  *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 242016-01-11T02:08:15  *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 252016-01-11T02:15:19  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 262016-01-11T02:43:44  *** p15 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 272016-01-11T02:47:07  *** belcher has quit IRC
 282016-01-11T02:48:38  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
 292016-01-11T03:27:19  *** arowser has quit IRC
 302016-01-11T03:27:48  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 312016-01-11T03:32:00  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
 322016-01-11T03:32:37  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 332016-01-11T03:43:37  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 342016-01-11T03:50:55  *** xiangfu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 352016-01-11T04:32:00  *** jayd3e has quit IRC
 362016-01-11T04:43:33  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 372016-01-11T04:59:56  *** dermoth has quit IRC
 382016-01-11T05:00:58  *** Luke-Jr has quit IRC
 392016-01-11T05:01:33  *** Luke-Jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 402016-01-11T05:19:07  *** Luke-Jr has quit IRC
 412016-01-11T05:19:43  *** Luke-Jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 422016-01-11T05:21:30  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
 432016-01-11T05:21:53  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 442016-01-11T06:41:00  *** d_t has quit IRC
 452016-01-11T06:45:31  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
 462016-01-11T06:45:53  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 472016-01-11T06:52:40  *** dcousens has quit IRC
 482016-01-11T07:09:27  *** p15 has quit IRC
 492016-01-11T07:39:38  *** p15 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 502016-01-11T08:04:07  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 512016-01-11T08:08:13  *** trippysalmon has quit IRC
 522016-01-11T08:22:24  *** Arnavion2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532016-01-11T08:24:05  <jonasschnelli> call for final review: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6480
 542016-01-11T08:24:36  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
 552016-01-11T08:24:47  *** Arnavion2 is now known as Arnavion
 562016-01-11T08:28:27  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
 572016-01-11T08:28:28  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 582016-01-11T08:31:38  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
 592016-01-11T08:46:27  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 602016-01-11T08:55:00  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
 612016-01-11T08:55:10  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 622016-01-11T08:55:25  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 632016-01-11T09:08:13  *** dcousens has quit IRC
 642016-01-11T09:16:14  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
 652016-01-11T09:18:00  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 662016-01-11T09:30:39  <jonasschnelli> morcos: ping
 672016-01-11T09:42:37  *** AtashiCon has quit IRC
 682016-01-11T09:43:00  *** AtashiCon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 692016-01-11T09:53:39  *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 702016-01-11T10:05:44  *** arowser has quit IRC
 712016-01-11T10:06:07  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 722016-01-11T10:11:49  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 732016-01-11T11:12:05  *** btccharm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 742016-01-11T11:21:50  *** btccharm has quit IRC
 752016-01-11T11:53:24  *** JackH has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 762016-01-11T12:23:48  *** adam3us has quit IRC
 772016-01-11T12:26:32  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 782016-01-11T12:37:50  *** xiangfu has quit IRC
 792016-01-11T12:49:06  *** rubensayshi has quit IRC
 802016-01-11T12:57:57  *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 812016-01-11T13:01:56  *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 822016-01-11T13:08:59  *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 832016-01-11T13:36:19  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
 842016-01-11T13:38:09  *** btccharm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 852016-01-11T13:52:35  *** brg444 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 862016-01-11T13:56:43  *** Yoghur114 has quit IRC
 872016-01-11T13:59:29  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 882016-01-11T13:59:56  *** Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 892016-01-11T14:02:19  *** Yoghur114 has quit IRC
 902016-01-11T14:02:41  *** Yoghur114 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 912016-01-11T14:31:35  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
 922016-01-11T14:34:28  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 932016-01-11T14:35:08  *** zookolaptop is now known as zooko
 942016-01-11T14:38:10  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 952016-01-11T14:38:10  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 962016-01-11T14:39:06  <Luke-Jr> what's up with https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7213 ? seems to me this is a bugfix post-softfork activation, and ought to be in 0.12..
 972016-01-11T14:39:45  *** zooko` has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982016-01-11T14:40:59  *** zooko has quit IRC
 992016-01-11T14:44:42  *** zooko` is now known as zooko
1002016-01-11T14:53:30  <jonasschnelli> Luke-Jr: Yes. We should backport the OP_NOP2 rename.
1012016-01-11T14:57:29  <morcos> Luke-Jr: Can you point out where you think the priority calculation is broken (other than not including not in chain at time of acceptance inputs.  I'm pretty sure it doesn't have an off by one error.  but if so, it shoudl be fixed
1022016-01-11T14:58:46  <Luke-Jr> morcos: immediately after an input is confirmed, its value is multiplied by 0 toward its dependent's priority, rather than 1
1032016-01-11T14:59:42  <Luke-Jr> morcos: I discovered this while writing unit tests for your bugfix in 7149
1042016-01-11T15:00:23  <Luke-Jr> although thinking about it today, I'm not entirely sure the fix needs to be as complicated as I made it
1052016-01-11T15:00:27  <morcos> Luke-Jr: you're saying the supposedly correct dynamic priority is wrong, not that there is a "bug" in the calculation in master?
1062016-01-11T15:00:44  <Luke-Jr> morcos: both
1072016-01-11T15:00:50  <morcos> i'm sure that the calculation in 7149 is the same as the old calculaiton
1082016-01-11T15:00:55  <morcos> its checked in mempool.check isn't it
1092016-01-11T15:01:11  <Luke-Jr> morcos: for given height X, it is correct, but for block X+1, it uses height X
1102016-01-11T15:01:52  <morcos> can you point me to a line # that you think gives a wrong result (in master) i'm having trouble following what you mean
1112016-01-11T15:02:10  <morcos> but this was checked by comparing the new calculation to the old calculation and they were the same to within double precision
1122016-01-11T15:02:18  <morcos> (for 7149 version that is)
1132016-01-11T15:02:26  <Luke-Jr> this is how I fixed it http://codepad.org/5il1jH1K
1142016-01-11T15:03:10  <Luke-Jr> but I'm not sure even that fix is correct now
1152016-01-11T15:03:25  <Luke-Jr> probably just the rpcblockchain and mining *calls* need a +1
1162016-01-11T15:03:50  <Luke-Jr> oh, and AcceptToMemoryPool's usage probably ought to have a +1, but it hasn't worked right since it was added there
1172016-01-11T15:04:35  <morcos> Luke-Jr: I htink you are mistaken
1182016-01-11T15:04:35  *** adam3us has quit IRC
1192016-01-11T15:04:51  <Luke-Jr> morcos: well, then explain why the unit test I wrote doesn't pass on it? :P
1202016-01-11T15:05:04  <Luke-Jr> s/unit/rpc/
1212016-01-11T15:05:13  <morcos> So if a new input is included in the block chain at block X.  that input adds 0 to the priority of the tx at block X.
1222016-01-11T15:05:29  <morcos> but now the inchainINput value will be increased by new input, and the cached height will = X
1232016-01-11T15:05:49  <morcos> so if you ask for priority at (X+1) then it will include that newly inchain input in the aging
1242016-01-11T15:06:05  <morcos> but this is only relevant to 7149 and not master anyway
1252016-01-11T15:06:40  *** rubensayshi has quit IRC
1262016-01-11T15:06:42  *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1272016-01-11T15:06:47  <morcos> Luke-Jr: which line in your test fails?
1282016-01-11T15:06:50  <Luke-Jr> the main problem is you're asking for priority X when it should be X+1
1292016-01-11T15:07:00  <Luke-Jr> morcos: literally every non-zero comparison
1302016-01-11T15:07:11  <Luke-Jr> they're always off by one block
1312016-01-11T15:07:34  <Luke-Jr> once block X is mined, the current priority for all practical purposes is X+1
1322016-01-11T15:07:46  <Luke-Jr> because miners are mining X+1, not X
1332016-01-11T15:08:08  <morcos> yes i agree, and that is what is evaluated for mempool acceptance and mining
1342016-01-11T15:08:27  <Luke-Jr> mempool acceptance at least uses chainTip.height()
1352016-01-11T15:08:35  <morcos> i'm not sure what is returned in getrawmempool, maybe that is wrong
1362016-01-11T15:09:09  <Luke-Jr> mining appears to use the correct height, you're right
1372016-01-11T15:10:09  <morcos> oh, interesting, perhaps there is a bug in the mempool acceptance code.
1382016-01-11T15:10:32  <morcos> i dont think there is a bug in the calculation though..  i'll try to find some time today to look at it
1392016-01-11T15:10:44  <morcos> can you point me to the branch with your rpc test so i can try it out
1402016-01-11T15:12:22  *** btccharm has quit IRC
1412016-01-11T15:12:29  <Luke-Jr> I haven't committed it yet, because the pruning rpc test fails with it, and I need to confirm it isn't because of my changes
1422016-01-11T15:12:57  <Luke-Jr> it's in that patch I linked though
1432016-01-11T15:19:29  <morcos> Luke-Jr: nope, no bug in ATMP
1442016-01-11T15:19:58  <morcos> The dpriority that is calculated and stored as the starting priority is the priority of the tx at block X (chain tip)
1452016-01-11T15:20:26  <morcos> but then when it is evaluated for acceptance to the mempool there is a separate call to GetPriority which feeds in chainActive.height + 1
1462016-01-11T15:20:44  <morcos> see line 972
1472016-01-11T15:21:58  <morcos> so if your concern is that startingriority represents a priority that is never actual used for anything, i suppose thats true, but thats the way its always been
1482016-01-11T15:22:09  <morcos> i believe priority used in any calculations are always correct
1492016-01-11T15:23:08  <morcos> the priority value returned by getrawmempool has always been incorrect for currentpriority anyway
1502016-01-11T15:23:19  <Luke-Jr> [15:19:58] <morcos> The dpriority that is calculated and stored as the starting priority is the priority of the tx at block X (chain tip) <-- that's not what it ought to be
1512016-01-11T15:23:29  <Luke-Jr> oh
1522016-01-11T15:23:53  <Luke-Jr> I see
1532016-01-11T15:24:26  <Luke-Jr> morcos: yes, seems the bugs are entirely in getrawmempool then
1542016-01-11T15:24:54  <Luke-Jr> which as you note, has never worked right in that regard
1552016-01-11T15:25:12  <Luke-Jr> still would be good to fix it though
1562016-01-11T15:25:23  <Luke-Jr> if for no reason other than to have working rpc tests
1572016-01-11T15:25:36  * Luke-Jr ponders adding priority to the GBT output so we can test that as well
1582016-01-11T15:26:05  <morcos> i don't understand what you want to "fix"
1592016-01-11T15:26:19  <morcos> startingpriority can be defined to be anything we want
1602016-01-11T15:26:53  <morcos> its a meaningless number only used in getrawmempool rpc call
1612016-01-11T15:26:59  <morcos> why change the definition of it?
1622016-01-11T15:27:10  <Luke-Jr> "currentpriority" at the very least
1632016-01-11T15:27:35  <Luke-Jr> with regard to startingpriority, why change it => so it has some meaningful purpose
1642016-01-11T15:27:36  <morcos> by fix currentpriority you mean make it evaluate at X+1 ?
1652016-01-11T15:27:47  <Luke-Jr> morcos: yes
1662016-01-11T15:28:35  <morcos> ehh.. not worth it in my opinion.
1672016-01-11T15:28:40  <Luke-Jr> …
1682016-01-11T15:33:05  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1692016-01-11T15:43:21  *** arubi has quit IRC
1702016-01-11T15:45:53  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1712016-01-11T15:53:43  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722016-01-11T15:58:10  *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732016-01-11T16:00:27  *** arubi has quit IRC
1742016-01-11T16:01:23  <morcos> jonasschnelli: ping?
1752016-01-11T16:01:39  <morcos> your comments about NotifyTransaction on the abandontransaction PR
1762016-01-11T16:01:48  <morcos> i'm concerned that that would be needed in MarkConflicted as well
1772016-01-11T16:01:56  <morcos> I just copied the code from there.
1782016-01-11T16:03:18  <morcos> I'm not very familiar with how the wallet/gui works, but NotifyTransaction is used to update the GUI I guess?  What notifications do we have to worry about?  Do other things like the available balance know to get updated if you just do that notification?
1792016-01-11T16:04:31  <morcos> your other commits are also things that I think are good ideas, but I'm still holding out hope for abandontransaction to make it in 0.12, so not sure if it helps to add those now or not
1802016-01-11T16:05:20  <morcos> again the tx categories are something I have no familiarity with, but it seems to me that you can mark txs you receive as abandoned as well (although i don't think this would have any practical effect now, it might if we in the future sort such txs differently)
1812016-01-11T16:08:23  *** tripleslash_q has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1822016-01-11T16:09:06  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
1832016-01-11T16:09:19  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1842016-01-11T16:10:07  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1852016-01-11T16:12:26  <jonasschnelli> morcos: still here?
1862016-01-11T16:12:35  <morcos> yep
1872016-01-11T16:12:40  *** tripleslash_q has quit IRC
1882016-01-11T16:12:41  * jonasschnelli reading backlog
1892016-01-11T16:14:36  <jonasschnelli> morcos: I guess MarkConflicted() is always used together with the NotifyTransaction signal.
1902016-01-11T16:15:02  <jonasschnelli> AddToWallet() calls the signal.
1912016-01-11T16:15:35  <jonasschnelli> morcos: and sure, ... feel free to keep the informative PRs (listtransactions and new GUI tx state) out for 0.12.
1922016-01-11T16:15:36  <morcos> jonasschnelli: oh. interesting.
1932016-01-11T16:15:47  <morcos> thats what copy-paste coding gets you!
1942016-01-11T16:16:06  <jonasschnelli> abandon use a own db write,... so there it's necesarry.
1952016-01-11T16:18:43  <morcos> sorry, i didn't understand that?
1962016-01-11T16:18:54  <morcos> but maybe you are trying to say what i was just going to ask about
1972016-01-11T16:19:00  <jonasschnelli> hah...
1982016-01-11T16:19:22  <morcos> it looks like markconflicted does things like write the tx to the database and mark it dirty on its own, when those same things happen in AddToWallet
1992016-01-11T16:19:33  <jonasschnelli> Your new setAbandoned() call creates its own instance of CWalletDB()...
2002016-01-11T16:19:53  <jonasschnelli> it's a rare case... because rest is adding keys or adding wtx.
2012016-01-11T16:20:09  <jonasschnelli> in terms os wtx,.. everything goes over AddToWallet
2022016-01-11T16:20:38  <jonasschnelli> not important at all, .. but you need to call the NotifyTransaction signal then
2032016-01-11T16:20:56  <morcos> seems like i also might need to call the -walletnotify script
2042016-01-11T16:20:57  <jonasschnelli> (which takes care for balance update, etc. in the GUI)
2052016-01-11T16:21:17  <jonasschnelli> morcos: yes. Could be possible... also keep ZMQ in mind (maybe same interfae)
2062016-01-11T16:21:22  <jonasschnelli> *interface
2072016-01-11T16:21:48  <morcos> i think those same thigns are missing from MarkConflicted in the case it gets called from AddToWalletIfInvolvingMe right?
2082016-01-11T16:22:13  <morcos> because it can cause txs to be marked as conflicted , but AddToWallet doesn't get called
2092016-01-11T16:22:24  <morcos> because the tx we are considering is the double spend
2102016-01-11T16:22:44  <jonasschnelli> yes... could be necessary there. Agreed. But out of scope four your abandoned PR?
2112016-01-11T16:22:57  <morcos> perhaps, but i think a necessary bugfix for 0.12
2122016-01-11T16:23:02  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Agreed.
2132016-01-11T16:23:30  <morcos> ok.. i have to do interview soon, but will work on this this afternoon
2142016-01-11T16:24:58  <jonasschnelli> -walletnotify needs also a refactor... your right.
2152016-01-11T16:25:08  <jonasschnelli> But can be done later... happy interview.
2162016-01-11T16:26:55  *** zooko has quit IRC
2172016-01-11T16:42:56  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
2182016-01-11T16:50:26  <btcdrak> Is there a way to prevent travis from running on a PR?
2192016-01-11T16:51:04  <phantomcircuit> btcdrak, dont think so
2202016-01-11T16:52:02  <btcdrak> phantomcircuit: TIL https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/customizing-the-build/#Skipping-a-build
2212016-01-11T17:12:52  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2222016-01-11T17:13:31  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2232016-01-11T17:46:00  *** fkhan_ has quit IRC
2242016-01-11T18:04:48  *** fkhan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2252016-01-11T18:09:10  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262016-01-11T18:18:25  *** adam3us has quit IRC
2272016-01-11T18:21:40  *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2282016-01-11T18:24:38  *** droark has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292016-01-11T18:29:35  *** p15 has quit IRC
2302016-01-11T18:35:17  *** adam3us has quit IRC
2312016-01-11T19:01:00  *** fkhan_ has quit IRC
2322016-01-11T19:07:40  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332016-01-11T19:08:12  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2342016-01-11T19:13:56  *** fkhan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2352016-01-11T19:14:30  <Taek> do verion numbers get updated when changes are backported?
2362016-01-11T19:15:24  <btcdrak> Taek: what do you mean?
2372016-01-11T19:15:29  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2382016-01-11T19:15:47  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2392016-01-11T19:16:30  <btcdrak> Taek: if something get backported to 0.10 for example it will eventually make it into a 0.10.x maintenance release, if that's what you mean.
2402016-01-11T19:16:46  <Taek> say you have v0.10.3, and then you backport a change (e.g. https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7217#issuecomment-170642993) -> 0.10.4
2412016-01-11T19:16:47  <Taek> ok
2422016-01-11T19:32:55  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432016-01-11T19:34:14  <morcos> jonasschnelli: wumpus: actually i took jonas's commit for #7312, but I'm not sure I understand well enough to know whether both additions he added are needed
2442016-01-11T19:35:02  <morcos> I'm not sure how the GUI notifications work
2452016-01-11T19:35:34  <morcos> but why would it be necessary to call NotifyTransactionChanged there for each of the txs that had an input being spent
2462016-01-11T19:36:04  <morcos> But it isn't necessary to do that in SyncTransaction when we are marking those prevtxs dirty b/c their inputs are being spent in the first place?
2472016-01-11T19:40:13  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482016-01-11T19:56:04  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2492016-01-11T19:58:34  *** benjyz1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2502016-01-11T20:12:37  *** benjyz1 has quit IRC
2512016-01-11T20:18:35  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
2522016-01-11T20:21:31  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2532016-01-11T20:27:37  *** morcos has quit IRC
2542016-01-11T20:30:24  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552016-01-11T20:33:52  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2562016-01-11T20:39:26  *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
2572016-01-11T21:08:06  *** brg444 has quit IRC
2582016-01-11T21:11:03  *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592016-01-11T21:20:24  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602016-01-11T21:32:52  <jonasschnelli> morcos: I guess it's necessary.
2612016-01-11T21:33:19  <morcos> jonasschnelli: it was hard for me to tell what that Notify call actually does
2622016-01-11T21:33:48  <morcos> but it seems to me the two function are determine whether the balance needs to be updated and determine whethehr the transaction record should be shown
2632016-01-11T21:34:13  <jonasschnelli> morcos: I think from the wallet perspective it's easy: notify every changed transaction.
2642016-01-11T21:35:15  <jonasschnelli> What if a signal listener relays on a info when a child-tx gets abandoned?
2652016-01-11T21:35:28  <morcos> jonasschnelli: its not done anywhere else that the only relevant update is whether the txs outputs are spent or not
2662016-01-11T21:35:37  <morcos> for instance look at SyncTransaction
2672016-01-11T21:35:52  <morcos> it marks all the prevouts as dirty so we can recalculate balances
2682016-01-11T21:35:55  <jonasschnelli> (Phone typing)...
2692016-01-11T21:35:59  <morcos> but it doesn't notify anything
2702016-01-11T21:37:00  <morcos> well take a look tomorrow at your computer, but i think its unnecessary and isn't in keeping with the other places we call NotifyTransaction
2712016-01-11T21:37:02  <jonasschnelli> Yes. Maybe we remove the second line. But I think we should look at it from a signal/future-feature perspective.
2722016-01-11T21:37:14  <morcos> but I wasn't comfortable enough with the GUI code to change your commit
2732016-01-11T21:37:33  <morcos> jonasschnelli: but we have to define what the signals are for
2742016-01-11T21:37:44  <jonasschnelli> Okay. I'll have a closer look tmr.
2752016-01-11T21:37:52  <jonasschnelli> morcos: not really. :-)
2762016-01-11T21:38:07  <morcos> and if we want them to be for letting you know that some previously spent inputs are now unspent, then we need it to be the case for everytime that status changes
2772016-01-11T21:38:10  <jonasschnelli> But IMO call whenever a transaction changes.
2782016-01-11T21:38:29  <morcos> its very confusing to someone trying to understand the code, if sometimes you call it and sometimes yo udont
2792016-01-11T21:38:46  <morcos> this would be literally the only case of calling it for a change like this i think
2802016-01-11T21:38:54  <jonasschnelli> Yes. It should follow the same concept everywhere in the code. Agree.
2812016-01-11T21:39:18  <jonasschnelli> Yes.
2822016-01-11T21:39:34  <jonasschnelli> Remove the seconds line / signal call
2832016-01-11T21:39:46  <morcos> ok, great, i'll wait for your thoughts tomorrow.  i see your point.  someone in the future might want to hide txs that have been completely spent or mark them differently or something.
2842016-01-11T21:39:52  <morcos> but then we shoudl be consistent everywhere
2852016-01-11T21:39:52  <morcos> ok
2862016-01-11T21:40:02  <jonasschnelli> Right.
2872016-01-11T21:40:07  <morcos> i'll remove it for now in the hopes that wumpus will merge this if its done changing
2882016-01-11T21:40:21  <morcos> thanks!
2892016-01-11T21:40:38  <jonasschnelli> Yes. We need to get this in asap.
2902016-01-11T21:40:45  <jonasschnelli> Thanks and nite
2912016-01-11T21:53:10  *** gijensen has quit IRC
2922016-01-11T21:53:31  *** gijensen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2932016-01-11T21:57:31  *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2942016-01-11T21:59:05  <GitHub186> [bitcoin] crowning- opened pull request #7327: [Wallet] Transaction View: LastMonth calculation fixed (master...patch-2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7327
2952016-01-11T22:06:03  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962016-01-11T22:16:25  *** murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2972016-01-11T22:39:30  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2982016-01-11T22:44:23  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
2992016-01-11T22:44:52  *** zookolap` has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3002016-01-11T23:09:55  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
3012016-01-11T23:11:29  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022016-01-11T23:13:00  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
3032016-01-11T23:13:20  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3042016-01-11T23:17:14  *** fkhan_ has quit IRC
3052016-01-11T23:18:53  *** Thireus has quit IRC
3062016-01-11T23:21:12  *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3072016-01-11T23:21:50  *** fkhan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3082016-01-11T23:28:55  *** brg444 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3092016-01-11T23:29:54  *** adam3us has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3102016-01-11T23:41:22  *** murch has quit IRC
3112016-01-11T23:42:50  *** Thireus has quit IRC
3122016-01-11T23:45:19  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC