The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Code Coverage & Benchmarks

For details see: https://corecheck.dev/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/33025.

Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process.
A summary of reviews will appear here.

Unfortunately this is not what I had in mind when I wrote my comment. What I meant was that there should be a test that triggers the uncovered error message through wallet usage. Can you give this a try instead?

Direct coverage of the PSBTErrorString function isn't very valuable IMO because it is just a wrapper of a switch statement which can be tested implicitly with tests such as I mention above. Test that are this closely tied to implementations are usually more hassle than they are worth in terms of the value they add because they tend to need changes often but don't cover any meaningful logic.

his is not what I had in mind when I wrote my comment. What I meant was that there should be a test that triggers the uncovered error message through wallet usage. Can you give this a try instead?

Gotcha, so it's more of a functional test for the behavior that triggers PSBTError::INCOMPLETE,
Not a unit test to cover PSBTErrorString.

And I agree that testing case statement isn't really super valuable. I will give it another try, thanks!

Closing for now. You can open a new pull request for the new approach, once there is one.