wallet.cpp file too big

[oxarbitrage]

https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/blob/master/libraries/wallet/wallet.cpp

4500 lines and growing. this makes harder to edit the file with editors in older machines.

this issue is open to discuss what will be the best approach to split the file in several files or similar.

CORE TEAM TASK LIST

• Evaluate / Prioritize Feature Request
• Refine User Stories / Requirements
• Define Test Cases
• Design / Develop Solution
  • Assigned: @cogutvalera
  • Estimated: 15 hours
  • Remitted: Weeks 44-45
• Perform QA/Testing
• Update Documentation

[cogutvalera]

IMHO we should separate Wallet API into next different logical parts, perhaps like:

1. graphene::wallet::commands_api
2. graphene::wallet::account_api
3. graphene::wallet::asset_api
4. graphene::wallet::transaction_api
5. graphene::wallet::history_api
6. graphene::wallet::crypto_api
7. graphene::wallet::network_api

Each logical part should be implemented in separated file.

@ryanRfox I want to claim this issue if possible. Thanks !

[oxarbitrage]

The wallet.cpp file haves functions that are internal, member functions of the implementation and also wallet_api.

Separating wallet_api_impl and wallet_api in different files will reduce files size.

If we want to do categories i think they can be a bit different as the wallet is different than the api. Maybe a governance category can include witness, committee_member and worker stuff, wallet can include imports and such and so on. If we want to follow that path i can create a more detailed list of stuff that can be included on each category.

[cogutvalera]

@oxarbitrage Thank you !

Separating wallet_api_impl and wallet_api in different files will reduce files size.

Currently wallet.cpp file has 4645 lines of code + comments (in develop branch).
So IMHO separating by 2 files isn't better than separating by different logical parts or categorize them as you suggest. My solution requires minor changes just to separate different logical parts in different files like for example database.cpp implementation.

@oxarbitrage your idea is really nice and requires more time & efforts to implement it fully & absolutely correctly ! IMHO your idea requires to create another new issue and new sub-issues maybe for such big changes.

Thanks !

[cogutvalera]

@ryanRfox my estimation for this issue is approximately 15 hours. Thanks !

[ryanRfox]

Assigned to @cogutvalera for 15 hours.

[cogutvalera]

@ryanRfox Thanks !

[cogutvalera]

PR is ready #1413

[cogutvalera]

guys check please this PR #1413

[ryanRfox]

Moving to (next) Feature Release because @cogutvalera has expressed interest in this and a few related Issues. My intent is the Core Team will discuss, prioritize and determine next steps by commenting within these Issues. We are going into a Release week, so our focus is elsewhere. Please expect an update near 13 FEB.

[cogutvalera]

Thnaks !

[jmjatlanta]

Fixed by PR #2013