Implement version specific types

[GideonBature]

Implement Version-Specific Types for Status omitted

This PR addresses issue #115 by implementing the methods with status of 'omitted' in methods with version-specific types. Previously, 'omitted' was used in cases where return types were standard or seemingly inconsequential (e.g., null, standard library types). However, this approach introduced a risk: if the return type of such methods changes in future Bitcoin Core versions, we would not catch it.

To fix this, this PR:

• Defines version-specific types for affected methods.
• Updates method definitions to use Method::new_no_model in corresponding methods.
• Adds integration tests for each updated method to verify correctness and catch future regressions.

This improves type safety, clarity, and future-proofing of the client interface.

---

Summary of Work Done

🚀 Blockchain Methods

Tested with:

cargo test --features=28_0 --test blockchain

S/N	Method Name	Implemented	Test Written
1	pruneblockchain	✅	✅
2	savemempool	✅	✅
3	scantxoutset	✅	✅
4	verifychain	✅	✅

---

🌐 Network Methods

Tested with:

cargo test --features=28_0 --test network

S/N	Method Name	Implemented	Test Written
5	addnode	✅	✅
6	clearbanned	✅	✅
7	disconnectnode	✅	✅
8	getconnectioncount	✅	✅
9	listbanned	✅	✅
10	ping	✅	✅
11	setban	✅	✅
12	setnetworkactive	✅	✅

---

💰 Wallet Methods

Tested with:

cargo test --features=28_0 --test wallet

S/N	Method Name	Implemented	Test Written
13	abandontransaction	✅	✅
14	abortrescan	✅	✅
15	backupwallet	✅	✅
16	encryptwallet	✅	✅
17	importaddress	✅	✅
18	importmulti	✅	✅
19	importprivkey	✅	✅
20	importprunedfunds	✅	✅
21	importpubkey	✅	✅
22	importwallet	✅	✅
23	keypoolrefill	✅	✅
24	lockunspent	✅	✅
25	removeprunedfunds	✅	✅
26	sethdseed	✅	✅
27	settxfee	✅	✅
28	walletlock	✅	✅
29	walletpassphrase	✅	✅
30	walletpassphrasechange	✅	✅

---

✅ Ready for review

Closes #115

[tcharding]

Looking good mate. I wouldn't personally bother pruning at the moment. At this stage just checking that the returned data is the correct shape is enough.

[GideonBature]

I have effected the changes reviewed, please do have a check when you are chanced.

[tcharding]

Getting there man, keep at it.

[GideonBature]

Changes effected... Thank you so much for all the reviews, I am really learning and understanding the codebase more.

[tcharding]

I just introduced a new style of writing test code in #125. Please follow the same style when you write your new tests. Thanks man!

[GideonBature]

Alright, I will check it out... Thank you :).

[tcharding]

You got a rebase mistake in there mate. In verify/src/method/

[tcharding]

In case its useful to you I have this alias

which mc
mc: aliased to git grep -l '<<<<'

Then I use mc to check for merge conflicts after rebasing.

[tcharding]

This is going to be hard for me to review because its so big but also I appreciate that it is hard to work on this crate without doing big changesets so I'm happy to review this but there may be a few iterations.

[tcharding]

Some things I found:

• Need to set the status to done e.g. types/src/v17/mod.rs when each method is added and tested
• If you could use the new test format I'd appreciate it, otherwise I have to go over all the tests and add it

    let json: VerifyTxOutProof = node.client.verify_tx_out_proof(&proof)?;
    let model: Result<mtype::VerifyTxOutProof, _> = json.into_model();
    let txids = model.unwrap();

The point to this is to check that all the re-exports were done correctly.

Or using PruneBlockchain

    let _: PruneBlockchain = node.client.prune_blockchain(target_height);

It would probably be best to push up an initial patch that does just one method completely so I can review that and then you could do all the others as a second patch. Sorry I should have said that weeks ago, my bad. There is a way to stage code chunks so you can pull the changes out - let me know if you want more tips on that.

[tcharding]

Appreciate your efforts man, this is not the easiest crate to work on. Holla at me if you have any other questions.

[GideonBature]

You got a rebase mistake in there mate. In verify/src/method/

Noted, thank you for spotting it out.

[GideonBature]

This is going to be hard for me to review because its so big but also I appreciate that it is hard to work on this crate without doing big changesets so I'm happy to review this but there may be a few iterations.

No Problem, I will make all changes necessary as you review! :).

[GideonBature]

Some things I found:

• Need to set the status to done e.g. types/src/v17/mod.rs when each method is added and tested
• If you could use the new test format I'd appreciate it, otherwise I have to go over all the tests and add it

    let json: VerifyTxOutProof = node.client.verify_tx_out_proof(&proof)?;
    let model: Result<mtype::VerifyTxOutProof, _> = json.into_model();
    let txids = model.unwrap();

The point to this is to check that all the re-exports were done correctly.

Or using PruneBlockchain

    let _: PruneBlockchain = node.client.prune_blockchain(target_height);

It would probably be best to push up an initial patch that does just one method completely so I can review that and then you could do all the others as a second patch. Sorry I should have said that weeks ago, my bad. There is a way to stage code chunks so you can pull the changes out - let me know if you want more tips on that.

True, almost forgot changing their status to done.

Okayyy, now I see the reason why, for this particular methods, most of them returns null or just a standard type so I will implement for the others just like the example you provided. Thank you so much for the reviews.

I will also push up an initial patch with single method so you can review, before doing the others. I will look it up i.e. stage code chucks, and if there is anything I don't understand, I will definitely ask for clarity.

Once again thank you always :).