Refactor Subsidy Code

[SmartArray]

Refactor Subsidy Code

Looking at the code in validation.cpp:

digibyte/src/validation.cpp

Lines 1216 to 1244 in 1cb4d6b

	CAmount GetBlockSubsidy(int nHeight, const Consensus::Params& consensusParams)
	{
	CAmount nSubsidy = COIN;
	LogPrintf("block height for reward is %d\n", nHeight);
	if(nHeight < consensusParams.nDiffChangeTarget) {
	//this is pre-patch, reward is 8000.
	nSubsidy = 8000 * COIN;
	if(nHeight < 1440) //1440
	{
	nSubsidy = 72000 * COIN;
	}
	else if(nHeight < 5760) //5760
	{
	nSubsidy = 16000 * COIN;
	}
	} else {
	//patch takes effect after 67,200 blocks solved
	nSubsidy = GetDGBSubsidy(nHeight, consensusParams);
	}
	//make sure the reward is at least 1 DGB
	if(nSubsidy < COIN) {
	nSubsidy = COIN;
	}
	return nSubsidy;
	}

it is barely documented, has weird indentions and is hard to read.
The original Bitcoin Code-Style Convention was not followed at all.

This PR is supposed to tidy up the subsidy code before introducing future changes (see #20)

Expectations

The altered code must still pass the main_tests unit test with 100%.

Changes

d54c650 merged GetBlockSubsidy and GetDGBSubsidy into one function.
24b4d23 removes dead code that wasn't removed with the previous commit.

How to verify?

0. Clone using

git clone https://github.com/SmartArray/digibyte.git -b refactor/subsidy && cd digibyte

1. Prepare the build environment

./autogen.sh && ./configure

2. Compile the test suite

cd src/test
make -j4

3. Run it using

./test_digibyte --run_test=main_tests

Expected outcome

$ ./test_digibyte --run_test=main_tests
Running 2 test cases...
*** No errors detected

[ChillingSilence]

ACK, beautifully commented too! 👍 Thanks @SmartArray

[SmartArray]

ACK, beautifully commented too! 👍 Thanks @SmartArray

Thank you @ChillingSilence. Documentation is the biggest intent of this PR.

Also, this PR is a great example of how development can continue on DigiByte Core now, since we have the working unit tests.

[gto90]

utACK

[JaredTate]

Looks good initially. The automated tests are great. But to double check everything 100% was this tested with a running tweaked 7.17.2 node to sync from scratch on main net?

[ChillingSilence]

Yes that's what the unit tests confirm. They do a full subsidy simulation.
If we don't trust the unit tests then we need a proposal for further amendments to them so that they are considered 'trustworthy'

However yes, it syncs from scratch.

[SmartArray]

Thanks @JaredTate for reviewing #40

Thanks to you, this PR is currently being validated by the approved automatic CI workflow and it should yield the build status shortly.

[gto90]

ACK

[JaredTate]

ACK