doersf
commented
7 years ago Removing that will break the script in the sense that you wouldn't get other failure errors thrown as exceptions. If you are able to handle those yourself, this is fine.
The way to handle this with Line 121 intact would be to catch the exception and parse the text showing the available balance for withdrawal. The amount should be usable without any further calls.
The new amount, if used in the same withdrawal API call (swapping out of the old amount you used), will execute the withdrawal of the total balance to the specified destination(s).
We will add an "amounts=max" option to handle this internally in the future, so you will be able to just use "amounts=max" and sign the transaction, and execute the withdrawal without any need for parsing errors like this.
dwjorgeb
stringsko
aflorea4
So, I want to merge all my balance from all addresses into my main address.
For that, I made a call to
get_address_balanceand it gives me theavailable_balance, but I have to deduct network fees.So, I needed to make a call to
get_network_fee_estimate, with the available balance, so it fails and returns me themax_withdrawal_available, so, then, I withdraw that amount from all those addresses into the main one.That's all fine, except that, instead of failing silently (like
$op->status == 'fail') and returning themax_withdrawal_available, theget_network_fee_estimatecall throws an exception, which crashes the script.I expected that when a call failed, it would give a "fail" status but not for it to throw an exception and crash the script. Or, at the very least, add a
max_withdrawable_balancecall, which would automatically deduct the network fees and give a withdrawable balance.My question, is it ok for me to get rid of the line 121 ?
if ($json_result->status != 'success') { throw new Exception('Failed: ' . $json_result->data->error_message); }or will it break something else?Thanks!