Great initiative. Been meaning to read up on the codebase and maybe look at parts of the codebase from a security perspective. Just looked at part of the code for the first time ever, so I might be a bit off on some of my remarks here, but at first glance, it looks like adding a few compiler flags to the code quality checks you discussed might not hurt the code. I was unable to check this thoroughly, as I didn't (don't) get a working commandline compile working on seperate cpp files due to an include of hardfork.hpp that I don't know where to get from.
The thing that jumped out at me most were some things that to me looked like code quality issues that the -Weffc++ compiler flag of the GNU compiler should be able to catch. Two other code quality checking flags I suspect could yield usefull improvement hits would be -Wshadow and -Wold-style-cast. Each of these three flags, I know from experience could potentially end up exposing bugs with security implications. As said, I couldn't really check because of the hardfork.hpp include.
Think I'll try to get acquainted with the codebase a bit over the coming weeks to see if I can get its structure and coding philosophy internalized.
Awesome stuff! The compile flags are set inside the makefiles that I didn't touch so far. But I noticed that a linter found a few hundred potential issues. I plnned to play around with the internals over the coming weeks.
If you have compile issues, talk to me on discord, I can help.
And if you give me your github username, I add you to the project as a potential reviewer.
Give me a few weeks to get better acquainted with the code base. Want to first figure out if I'dd rather be proposing or reviewing.