Merge #422: docs(wallet): fix misleading RBF comment in create_tx

76a8cc6 docs(wallet): fix misleading RBF comment in `create_tx` (Vadim Anufriev)

Pull request description:

  ### Description

  Fix misleading comment in `create_tx` regarding empty tx output logic. This addresses a documentation nitpick brought up by the 2024 [WizardSardine report](https://bitcoindevkit.org/audits/2024_q4/bdk_audit_report).

  - Replaced incorrect RBF example with sweeping UTXOs
  - Reordered comment items to match the code's condition order

  Closes #45

  ### Changelog notice

  Fixed:
  - Fix docs for `Wallet:create_tx` when empty output vector

  ### Checklists

  #### All Submissions:

  * [x] I've signed all my commits
  * [x] I followed the [contribution guidelines](https://github.com/bitcoindevkit/bdk/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md)
  * [x] I ran `just p` before pushing

ACKs for top commit:
  luisschwab:
    ACK 76a8cc6

Tree-SHA512: 6a788ffafbf195da2b6ef39b605319aec480dea8896dedc38a0244e3902e7f697611725ddfe81ca25204916802b4a6c5784d96ee1e78d21a003acdd3d8ef081f

Author: ValuedMammal

src/wallet/mod.rs

@@ -1492,10 +1492,10 @@ impl Wallet {
 
         if tx.output.is_empty() {
             // Uh oh, our transaction has no outputs.
-            // We allow this when:
-            // - We have a drain_to address and the utxos we must spend (this happens,
-            // for example, when we RBF).
-            // - We have a drain_to address and drain_wallet set.
+            // We allow this when we have a `drain_to` address and either:
+            // - `drain_wallet` is enabled
+            // - there are UTXOs we must spend (this happens, for example, when
+            // sweeping specific UTXOs to a given address)
             // Otherwise, we don't know who we should send the funds to, and how much
             // we should send!
             if params.drain_to.is_some() && (params.drain_wallet || !params.utxos.is_empty()) {