In D657#12022, @deadalnix wrote:

Except for the help file, this looks good. Please regenerate them to be non dirty and I'll accept.

regenerate to be non dirty

In T110#1656, @jasonbcox wrote:

Hey @jjz, thanks for taking this. In the future, please assign this ticket to yourself so that I know you're working on it. We don't want to be doing double work on the same ticket. ;)

In D657#12009, @schancel wrote:

Thanks @jjz. This looks good. I know you didn't originally add them, but can I ask you to please remove the autogenerated files and add them to the .gitignore?

In D657#11990, @freetrader wrote:

See previous comments for list of BCC occurrences that I think should be added.

update all files

In D657#11990, @freetrader wrote:

See previous comments for list of BCC occurrences that I think should be added.

I've made a diff https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D657

A lot of Chinese companies do this ,too https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc/issues/104

In D637#11666, @deadalnix wrote:

It seems like there are 2 changes backed in one here. The translation and the documentation. It would deserve 2 diffs.

I tested it ,it all passed .link

In D625#11434, @schancel wrote:

Hi jjz,

I don't see the other commit in the Phabricator UI. I believe every diff in phabricator is intended to be a single commit. Are you using arcanist to generate patches? If so you need to amend your commit before running arc diff

In D625#11434, @schancel wrote:

Hi jjz,

I don't see the other commit in the Phabricator UI. I believe every diff in phabricator is intended to be a single commit. Are you using arcanist to generate patches? If so you need to amend your commit before running arc diff

In D625#11398, @schancel wrote:

Hi jjz,

Thanks for the patch! Is this just autopep8 changes? I don't see anything related to adding colors to the test results.

use autopep8 to format python code

Add {} is a good way , otherwise it is not by reading the code