add sdk examples to send transaction

[Myestery]

@briwylde08
Added SDK examples to sendTransaction Page to close #622

[Myestery]

@briwylde08
This is ready for review

[briwylde08]

Thank you for the contribution! We'll get it reviewed and get back to you with an approval or follow-up questions!

[ElliotFriend]

Hi, @Myestery! Thanks (again lol) for contributing! I'll get to reviewing it first thing next week.

[ElliotFriend]

Hi, @Myestery! This is a really good start! I do have a couple changes I'd love to see. I'm curious (and this isn't a blocker, just my own question), why you went the route of creating the transaction's source account manually with the public key and sequence number? Often, I'll see people in the ecosystem use the server's built-in getAccount('G...') function to grab the account's current sequence number from the ledger. Was that a choice you were making, or just incidental? (Like I said, that's not a blocker, just wondering if there was a reason.)

I'm also a little conflicted a little about the transactions you're sending in the different examples:

• On the one hand, I think it's generally good practice to construct and send the same transaction in each of the languages for these kind of examples. This could help folks more clearly understand finer differences between each language's SDK. Might also make maintaining and updating them easier?
• On the other hand, it can be nice to demonstrate how to build different transactions, a little like a "bonus example" lol.

I'm on the fence, though. @briwylde08 Do you have any thoughts about that?

[Myestery]

Hi, @Myestery! This is a really good start! I do have a couple changes I'd love to see. I'm curious (and this isn't a blocker, just my own question), why you went the route of creating the transaction's source account manually with the public key and sequence number? Often, I'll see people in the ecosystem use the server's built-in getAccount('G...') function to grab the account's current sequence number from the ledger. Was that a choice you were making, or just incidental? (Like I said, that's not a blocker, just wondering if there was a reason.)

I'm also a little conflicted a little about the transactions you're sending in the different examples:

• On the one hand, I think it's generally good practice to construct and send the same transaction in each of the languages for these kind of examples. This could help folks more clearly understand finer differences between each language's SDK. Might also make maintaining and updating them easier?
• On the other hand, it can be nice to demonstrate how to build different transactions, a little like a "bonus example" lol.

I'm on the fence, though. @briwylde08 Do you have any thoughts about that?

I will go with your thoughts on these
Its nice to use the standard functions and maintain uniformity across the languages

[Myestery]

@ElliotFriend
This is ready for re-review

[ElliotFriend]

Looks great! Thanks so much @Myestery

Really helpful stuff you've provided!