quick patch which fixes the issue where if you use some macros from `http_server_handlers_map2.h` you have to be in the `epee` namespace or it doesn't compile. Now can remove `using namespace epee;` from header file `core_rpc_server.h`, which caused a couple of name qualifying mistakes
Replace all calls to epee::file_io::get_file_size with
boost::filesystem::file_size in order to avoid lossy conversions from
paths to strings, which tend to break filename resolution. This commit
fixes a bug on Windows where the get_info RPC call reported a zero
database size because BlockchainLMBD::get_database_size returned zero.
On Linux Mint 21.3, g++ Ubuntu 11.4.0-1ubuntu1~22.04, I get linking error for an undefined reference to `epee::string_tools::trim_right`. This PR reverts the changes
to epee_readline.cpp in commit c56ee140, which turns a `boost::trim_right` callsite into an `epee::string_tools::trim_right` callsite.
1. Use std::is_standard_layout and std::is_trivially_copyable instead of std::is_pod for KV byte-wise serialization, which fixes compile issue for Boost UUIDs
2. Removed reimplementation of std::hash for boost::uuids::uuid
3. Removed << operator overload for crypto::secret_key
4. Removed instances in code where private view key was dumped to the log in plaintext
Release version of #9450, containing C++14 modified assertions
Actions:
1. Remove unused functions from misc_os_dependent.h
2. Move three remaining functions, get_gmt_time, get_ns_count, and get_tick_count into time_helper.h
3. Remove unused functions from time_helper.h
4. Refactor get_ns_count and get_internet_time_str and get_time_interval_string
5. Remove/add includes as needed
Relevant commits on the old PR:
a9fbe52b029a59b131c47fa9e2817d
Here lies dozens of unused files. This commit is ONLY file deletions except
for the removing of a couple of #includes and removing filenames from CmakeLists
where appropriate.
Currently working on an EPEE [ser/de]ialization library for Rust and at first glance, EPEE seemed to have support for optional wrappers. However, after looking into it, this feature appears to be half-baked and unused. Furthermore, adding support for optional values would be better suited to implement at the storage level, in my opinion. That would make parsing DOMs easier and less error-prone. If anyone is currently using this code, please comment. Thanks!
At the time of writing, this PR has no merge conflicts with #8211
Lee *!* Clagett