Issue-#1391: Add generic estimateGas() function

[miquelcabot]

Fixes #1391

Changes proposed in this PR:

• Add generic estimateGas() function
• Call this function from all the estimate gas specific functions
• Call this function from all the functions that need to estimate the gas

[bogdanfazakas]

Can we somehow write a test for this method ? I'm thinking of having picking one contract method for eg and compare the value returned by this method to the value returned by calling estimate directly on the contract method as we did before ? Or maybe something else if you have a better idea .
By doing this i think we may also not have issues with code climate coverage dropping and the diff coverage

[miquelcabot]

@bogdanfazakas I can add a Utils.test file, for example, to test functions like this one. But I also think that this function is executed in a lot of tests, because all the specific functions used to estimate gas for concrete ABI functions, like estGasCreateNFT(), estGasAddNFTTemplate()... also calls this function. And this function is also called directly from all the functions that call the smart contract functions, like createNFT(), addNFTTemplate()...

[bogdanfazakas]

Looks good in general should work, do you think is worth testing it locally in the market on the estimates we have in publish flow ?

[codeclimate]

Code Climate has analyzed commit 6f74add and detected 89 issues on this pull request.

Here's the issue category breakdown:

Category	Count
Duplication	89

The test coverage on the diff in this pull request is 41.6% (50% is the threshold).

This pull request will bring the total coverage in the repository to 71.7% (-2.7% change).

View more on Code Climate.

[jamiehewitt15]

Looks good in general should work, do you think is worth testing it locally in the market on the estimates we have in publish flow ?

Yeah, I agree it would be good to test this with the market before merging. @miquelcabot have you done that?

Also, there seems to be a lot of codeclimate issues - 89. Have you looked into fixing them?

[miquelcabot]

Looks good in general should work, do you think is worth testing it locally in the market on the estimates we have in publish flow ?

Yeah, I agree it would be good to test this with the market before merging. @miquelcabot have you done that?

Also, there seems to be a lot of codeclimate issues - 89. Have you looked into fixing them?

@jamiehewitt15 Yes, I have tested locally with the market and it works.
And the codeclimate issues are related to code that I'm not modifying in this PR.

[jamiehewitt15]

Ok, looks good to me