While working on this PR https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/18570 I ran into a bit confusing situation where in one function a **CWallet reference** was expected while two others dealt with **CWallet pointers**. My initial reaction was: `let's harmonize them by making them references`. However, not being part of the PR itself I did't change anything and completed the PR first.

Now, after having analyzed the `rpcwallet.cpp` code I came to the conclusion that:

* converting them all into references is not the solution as they're originally **shared_ptr**s
* but also: there is no (visible) reason why every RPC function should begin like this:

```cpp
std::shared_ptr<CWallet> const pwallet = GetWalletForJSONRPCRequest(request);
const CWallet* const pwallet = wallet.get();
```

This clearly defeats the purpose of shared pointers for no obvious reason. *Maybe I am missing something?*

In my (unpublished) [code changes](https://github.com/brakmic/bitcoin/commit/0b3ee615491edf6f542631bf6ae6f72eac406550) all raw pointers got replaced with **shared_ptr**s but kept their original names (that is, *pwallet*). In the end, they're pointers too, so the most of the original code remained untouched.

However, some of the helper functions couldn't be changed because external code is accessing them and I didn't want to make this task "virulent". So I introduced new ("Ref") variants that expect **shared_ptr** parameters, namely: 

```cpp
void EnsureWalletRefIsUnlocked(const std::shared_ptr<CWallet>);
bool EnsureWalletRefIsAvailable(const std::shared_ptr<CWallet>, bool avoidException);
```

I have tested the code, with python and boost-tests, and could not find any errors. 
But before opening a PR I would like to open a discussion about this. 

Is there any reason to keep on working with raw pointers when every function call actually begins with *shared_ptr*s?

Regards,
}
    const UniValue& priv_keys = data.exists("keys") ? data["keys"].get_array() : UniValue();
    
    for (int i = range_start; i <= range_end; ++i) {
        FlatSigningProvider out_keys;
        std::vector<CScript> scripts_temp;
        parsed_desc->Expand(i, keys, scripts_temp, out_keys);
        std::copy(scripts_temp.begin(), scripts_temp.end(), std::inserter(script_pub_keys, script_pub_keys.end()));
        for (const auto& key_pair : out_keys.pubkeys) {
            ordered_pubkeys.push_back(key_pair.first);
        }
        for (const auto& x : out_keys.scripts) {
            import_data.import_scripts.emplace(x.second);
        }
        parsed_desc->ExpandPrivate(i, keys, out_keys);
        std::copy(out_keys.pubkeys.begin(), out_keys.pubkeys.end(), std::inserter(pubkey_map, pubkey_map.end()));
        std::copy(out_keys.keys.begin(), out_keys.keys.end(), std::inserter(privkey_map, privkey_map.end()));
        import_data.key_origins.insert(out_keys.origins.begin(), out_keys.origins.end());
    }
    for (size_t i = 0; i < priv_keys.size(); ++i) {
        const auto& str = priv_keys[i].get_str();
        CKey key = DecodeSecret(str);
        if (!key.IsValid()) {
            throw JSONRPCError(RPC_INVALID_ADDRESS_OR_KEY, "Invalid private key encoding");
        }
        CPubKey pubkey = key.GetPubKey();
        CKeyID id = pubkey.GetID();
        
        if (!pubkey_map.count(id)) {
            warnings.push_back("Ignoring irrelevant private key.");