fix(x/tx): fix amino json drift from legacy spec (backport #21825)

[mergify]

Description

Related to: #21782

Recent changes had caused all amino JSON legacy equivalence rapid tests to early out before running. As a consequence changes to the x/tx Amino JSON encoder were not properly tested, and several issues were not caught.

They are:

1. Field ordering was incorrect in some cases (including oneofs)
2. Decimals were rendering incorrectly

The tests and specs for amino JSON encoding have been tightened up. The tests now closely mimic the same code paths followed in the updated TxDecoder in x/tx.

---

Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

• included the correct type prefix in the PR title, you can find examples of the prefixes below:

• confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change

• targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)

• provided a link to the relevant issue or specification

• reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary

• included the necessary unit and integration tests

• added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md

• updated the relevant documentation or specification, including comments for documenting Go code

• confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

Please see Pull Request Reviewer section in the contributing guide for more information on how to review a pull request.

I have...

• confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
• confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
• reviewed state machine logic, API design and naming, documentation is accurate, tests and test coverage

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Introduced a new framework for testing transaction signing functionalities, enhancing the testing capabilities for compatibility and correctness.

• Bug Fixes

  • Improved error handling in encoding functions to manage invalid inputs and ensure consistent output formats.
  • Updated decimal representation in tests for better precision.

• Refactor

  • Streamlined test setup and logic for message generation and validation, enhancing code readability and maintainability.
  • Modularized custom signer logic for better maintainability.
  • Restructured encoding functions to improve flexibility and error handling.

• Chores

  • Removed unused imports and redundant error handling to contribute to a cleaner codebase.
  • Added a new entry in the changelog for the x/tx module regarding recent fixes.

---

This is an automatic backport of pull request #21825 done by [Mergify](https://mergify.com).

[mergify]

Cherry-pick of 2d40cc1 has failed:

On branch mergify/bp/release/v0.50.x/pr-21825
Your branch is up to date with 'origin/release/v0.50.x'.

You are currently cherry-picking commit 2d40cc1ab.
  (fix conflicts and run "git cherry-pick --continue")
  (use "git cherry-pick --skip" to skip this patch)
  (use "git cherry-pick --abort" to cancel the cherry-pick operation)

Changes to be committed:
	modified:   tests/integration/rapidgen/rapidgen.go
	modified:   tests/integration/tx/context_test.go
	new file:   tests/integration/tx/internal/util.go
	modified:   x/tx/signing/aminojson/encoder.go

Unmerged paths:
  (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
	both modified:   tests/integration/tx/aminojson/aminojson_test.go
	both modified:   x/auth/migrations/legacytx/stdtx_test.go
	both modified:   x/tx/CHANGELOG.md

To fix up this pull request, you can check it out locally. See documentation: https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/reviewing-changes-in-pull-requests/checking-out-pull-requests-locally

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

Bot user detected.

To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

---

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[julienrbrt]

I had to revert the tests here. bumped x/tx to a pseudo version from this branch before tagging after this PR.

@kocubinski, does it make sense to re-add them for 0.50? If so, could you please to it, it seems like it differed quite a bit from 0.52/main.

[julienrbrt]

Small bump @kocubinski

[julienrbrt]

hey @kocubinski, could you fix the last failing test?

[julienrbrt]

It looks like the integrations tests are failing because the json field order differs.
Additionally, previously it was showing zeroed values when empty, and now just empty/null

[kocubinski]

It looks like the integrations tests are failing because the json field order differs. Additionally, previously it was showing zeroed values when empty, and now just empty/null

The zero value behavior is different from main, maybe something went wrong when applying the patch?