Don't ignore the fee when it's explicitly specified.

[dskloet]

Make sure a specified transaction fee and outputs add up to the sum of the inputs.

[coveralls]

Coverage decreased (-0.04%) to 97.67% when pulling 16dc489 on dskloet:fix/fee into baf39f3 on bitpay:master.

[dskloet]

I'm looking at how the coverage could have decreased.

[maraoz]

LGTM

[dskloet]

I found a problem when investigating the coverage. I'll write a test and fix it. Is there a way to amend the pull request or do I have to make a new pull request?

[martindale]

@dskloet just push new commits to the same branch and it'll automatically associate them with this pull request! :)

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.01%) to 97.72% when pulling d1eb190 on dskloet:fix/fee into baf39f3 on bitpay:master.

[dskloet]

Thanks!
The problem wasn't caught by the tests because a test that expected a FeeError passed because it got a FeeError for a different reason than intended. I'm fixing it by introducing some different kinds of fee errors to distinguish the different cases.

I've pushed the fix.

[dskloet]

FYI: This pull requests addresses part of issue #1174.

[braydonf]

Perhaps we could make these additional errors part of a general FeeError:

if (err instanceof errors.Transaction.FeeError) {
  //...
}

And if interested in a more specific exception:

if (err instanceof errors.Transaction.FeeError.TooSmall) {
  //...
}

[braydonf]

Is there a use case for disabling the check if fees are different?

If so, the related Transaction serialization docs need to be updated with the additional serialization option.

[dskloet]

The check wasn't there before so I'm mostly just being defensive. Would you prefer I remove the ability to turn it off or add it to the docs?

[dskloet]

I realized that if it can be disabled, I also need to add a test that it can be disabled.

[braydonf]

For backwards compatibility, we can keep this as FeeError

[braydonf]

If the fee is specified and the actual fee would differ, I can't think of a use case to disable the check, as by not specifying an exact fee would be the means to do such. (I'll verify though).

[dskloet]

Makes sense. Let me know when you've verified it and I'll remove it.

[braydonf]

Yep, works as expected.

[coveralls]

Coverage increased (+0.01%) to 97.72% when pulling 056f171 on dskloet:fix/fee into baf39f3 on bitpay:master.