Add /address/:address/cardinals API #3979
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
raphjaph
requested changes
Oct 4, 2024
|
|
||
| let mut outputs = index.get_address_info(&address)?; | ||
|
|
||
| outputs.sort(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do people rely on lexicographical ordering? Or should it be ordered by size?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wasn't sure either! But followed the precedence of address
Line 860 in f1c1ee5
Comment on lines
+365
to
+412
| #[test] | ||
| fn address_cardinals_api() { | ||
| let core = mockcore::spawn(); | ||
|
|
||
| let ord = TestServer::spawn_with_args( | ||
| &core, | ||
| &["--index-runes", "--index-sats", "--index-addresses"], | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| create_wallet(&core, &ord); | ||
| core.mine_blocks(1); | ||
|
|
||
| let address = "bc1qxma2dwmutht4vxyl6u395slew5ectfpn35ug9l"; | ||
|
|
||
| let send = CommandBuilder::new(format!("wallet send --fee-rate 13.3 {address} 2btc")) | ||
| .core(&core) | ||
| .ord(&ord) | ||
| .run_and_deserialize_output::<Send>(); | ||
|
|
||
| core.mine_blocks(1); | ||
|
|
||
| let response = ord.json_request(format!("/address/{}/cardinals", address)); | ||
|
|
||
| assert_eq!(response.status(), StatusCode::OK); | ||
|
|
||
| let cardinals_json: Vec<api::Output> = serde_json::from_str(&response.text().unwrap()).unwrap(); | ||
|
|
||
| pretty_assert_eq!( | ||
| cardinals_json, | ||
| vec![api::Output { | ||
| address: Some(address.parse().unwrap()), | ||
| inscriptions: vec![], | ||
| indexed: true, | ||
| runes: BTreeMap::new(), | ||
| sat_ranges: Some(vec![(5000000000, 5200000000),]), | ||
| script_pubkey: ScriptBuf::from( | ||
| address | ||
| .parse::<Address<NetworkUnchecked>>() | ||
| .unwrap() | ||
| .assume_checked() | ||
| ), | ||
| spent: false, | ||
| transaction: send.txid, | ||
| value: 2 * COIN_VALUE, | ||
| }] | ||
| ); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be good to add a test that asserts that runic and inscription utxos are not returned.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense, will add them!
Do you think we should have /address/:address/ordinals endpoint for fetching just inscriptions and runes? I'm not sure about naming it /ordinals if it includes Runes, but it goes well with /cardinals.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This would make it easier for apps to rely on the address index for retrieving cardinals UTXOs.