Please see my previous comment clarifying how I made the rebase.

In D4243#103472, @deadalnix wrote:

Actually do the rebase an the backport, not just run the git rebase command.

fixes forward declarations order.

rebased

rebased

fixes wrong rebase

rebased from master

Have to check what happened with the tests.

removed comment

In D4234#102664, @deadalnix wrote:

It's not clear you go the dependency in the right order.in any case, it seems that you have https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11062 to go through first.

In D4243#102663, @deadalnix wrote:

I think you got the dependency reversed.

fix the rebase

In D4234#102134, @deadalnix wrote:

It looks like you have dependencies to backport first.

fix rebase error

fix squashing

fix squashing.

I have to fix the squash

bench code fixed.

fix cmake script style.

fix squashing

I don't know what happened with Squash... I lost some of the changes...

Duplicated D4220

Related to Github issue 335:
https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc/issues/335

In D4226#101538, @nakihito wrote:

This is a duplicate of D4220. In addition, it looks like either you either forgot to squash your changes or you are working on a branch with a dependency.

Was superseded by D4221.

Applying const T x : seq where T is a built-in type.

Duplicated with D4191.
Reason: arc usage error.

In D4191#100850, @deadalnix wrote:

In D4191#100826, @fpelliccioni wrote:

In D4191#100495, @deadalnix wrote:

Part of the PR are missing.

It is a partial application of the PR, I forgot to clarify it, sorry. (summary edited).
I didn't apply the rule for built-in types, because it makes no sense:
for (int x : seq)
is preferred over
for (int const& x : seq).
Have I missed anything else?

for (const int x : seq) is even better. There are still some missing, for instance in qt/bitcoingui.cpp .

test plan fixed.

In D4189#100853, @deadalnix wrote:

The test plan doesn't run.

The test plan is meant to describe the step you took to ensure that this patch is good. Clearly, the step described do not match what you have done, as they simply do not work.

In D4179#100740, @deadalnix wrote:

The test plan is meant to actually be ran.

In D4179#100728, @deadalnix wrote:

I see that you use make check-all in many tests. If you are using cmake, you should use ninja as it is faster. But right now, cmake is only a secondary option, so make sure the autotool build works.

update the summary to clarify that it is a partial application of the PR.

In D4191#100495, @deadalnix wrote:

Part of the PR are missing.

updated test plan.

fixes test plan.

fixes building error.

fixes building errors.

Duplicated: D4178