--- Day changed Mon Oct 05 2015 00:07 -!- trippysalmon [~Rob@ip4da81ded.direct-adsl.nl] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 00:13 -!- jl2012 [~jl2012@unaffiliated/jl2012] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 00:13 -!- jl2012 [~jl2012@unaffiliated/jl2012] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:14 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 00:27 -!- n0n0__ [~n0n0@x4d067290.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:39 -!- ParadoxSpiral [~ParadoxSp@p508B95A3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 00:49 < phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, do you think it's likely that we will require anything in the coinbase scriptSig area beyond the block height for a soft fork ever again? 00:49 < phantomcircuit> (yes i know predicting the future and what not) 00:50 < gmaxwell> phantomcircuit: I would think it somewhat likely. 00:51 < phantomcircuit> gmaxwell, was afraid you'd say that 00:51 * phantomcircuit grubles and goes back to things 01:26 -!- randy-waterhouse [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/randy-waterhouse] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:41 -!- adam3us [~Adium@195.138.228.20] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 01:42 -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@195.138.228.78] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:42 < CodeShark> why is qa/pull-tester/rpc-tests.py always getting modified when I build? 01:43 < CodeShark> oh, the permissions seem to have changed 01:43 < CodeShark> old mode 100644 01:43 < CodeShark> new mode 100755 01:45 < CodeShark> the fix: git config core.filemode false 01:51 -!- dcousens [~anon@c110-22-219-15.sunsh4.vic.optusnet.com.au] has quit [Quit: Lost terminal] 01:51 -!- CodeShark_ [~androirc@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 01:53 -!- rubensayshi [~ruben@91.206.81.13] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:02 < btcdrak> ping jgarzik: "CodeShark: the fix: git config core.filemode false" 02:02 < btcdrak> though I'm not sure anyone should be direct pushing to the repository, the point on pull requests is to catch mistakes 02:02 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 02:09 < CodeShark> looks like this is the offender: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/5467820be5404fa736436a1202079e764a4308b4 02:26 < CodeShark> is there any reason the file in the repo should have mode 644 and have configure change it to 755? 02:29 < btcdrak> CodeShark: it makes sense if you want a shell script for example, to be scripts to be executable by default. 02:29 < CodeShark> yes, but this is a python script 02:29 < CodeShark> do we ever need to run it directly? 02:29 < CodeShark> or do we always invoke it with python file.py? 02:43 < wumpus> uhm, configure shouldn't be changing the permissions of a file in the repository 02:43 < randy-waterhouse> more properly executable scripts should not be included in the EXTRA_DIST variable but using _SCRIPTS 02:43 < randy-waterhouse> wumpus right 02:44 < randy-waterhouse> then they will be clearly treated as executable binaries by whatever platform they land upon ... and handled accordingly 02:44 < wumpus> either it's packaged in the github repo with +x permissions, or it's not and called with python2, both are valid, but this isn't 02:44 < randy-waterhouse> agree 02:46 < wumpus> ok, so the file is 755 in the repo now, just the chmod XXX needs to be removed from configure.ac 02:47 < wumpus> both of them 02:48 < wumpus> although chmodding *generated* files in configure scfipt is fine, but not those that are in the repository 02:51 -!- n0n0__ [~n0n0@x4d067290.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 03:00 < GitHub165> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #6759: build: Remove unncecessary chmods after #6616 (master...2015_10_remove_unncecessary_chmods) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6759 03:01 < CodeShark> can I get some more ACKs? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6747 03:01 < CodeShark> if you ACK it I'll review your PR 03:01 < CodeShark> :) 03:10 -!- Guest11115 [~GAit@2-228-102-100.ip191.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: It was good while it lasted!] 03:41 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 03:42 < jonasschnelli> CodeShark: Yeah. PR review deals... 03:42 < CodeShark> ;) 03:43 < CodeShark> gotta prioritize somehow :) 03:44 < CodeShark> hell if any of us are going to go through all of them (well, maybe sipa will) 03:44 < CodeShark> :p 03:45 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 03:48 < jgarzik> I go through every one, once every couple of months, in additional to daily spot reviews based on incoming github email notifications. 03:48 < jgarzik> don't necessarily comment if things are going well, or nothing new to add 03:52 < CodeShark> ok, jgarzik will, too ;) 04:13 -!- n0n0__ [~n0n0@x4d067290.dyn.telefonica.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 04:25 < CodeShark> can we please stop paying attention to that clown who claims he coined the idea of not validating stuff? 04:26 < CodeShark> I created an SPV client in a few seconds the other day...by disabling all transaction checks 04:27 < CodeShark> perhaps I should start claiming I coined SPV 04:29 < jgarzik> CodeShark, IMO hard fork vs soft fork is on topic 04:29 < CodeShark> perhaps discussed by serious individuals 04:29 < jgarzik> (though off topic for this channel) 04:29 < CodeShark> this person deserves no attention from any of us - he's a dick 04:29 * wumpus stopped paying attention to that particular clown quite some time ago, and suggest keeping it out of this channel 04:29 < jgarzik> +1 04:30 < wumpus> he's not welcome here and neither is talk baout him 04:30 < CodeShark> sorry, wumpus - I'll stop 04:30 < jgarzik> Meta - IMO behavior should be unwelcome, not people 04:35 < GitHub167> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3ab3de8ba1a6...2844b9e90e58 04:35 < GitHub167> bitcoin/master ea70997 Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: Remove unnecessary chmods after #6616... 04:35 < GitHub167> bitcoin/master 2844b9e Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #6759... 04:35 < GitHub94> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6759: build: Remove unncecessary chmods after #6616 (master...2015_10_remove_unncecessary_chmods) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6759 04:39 < GitHub13> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/5f34a2510f6414a27ac3179ee461c944c8acd395 04:39 < GitHub13> bitcoin/master 5f34a25 ptschip: Changed rpc-tests.sh to rpc-tests.py in README.md... 04:39 < GitHub143> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6752: Changed rpc-tests.sh to rpc-tests.py in README.md (master...readme) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6752 04:41 < GitHub57> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/5f34a2510f64...e10a4ab904ab 04:41 < GitHub57> bitcoin/master 9ee5ac8 Pavel Janík: Rewrite help texts for features enabled by default. 04:41 < GitHub57> bitcoin/master e10a4ab Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #6748... 04:43 < GitHub178> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/e10a4ab904ab...a75c67364d34 04:43 < GitHub178> bitcoin/master bb24835 Wladimir J. van der Laan: build: disable -Wself-assign... 04:43 < GitHub178> bitcoin/master a75c673 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #6744... 04:43 < GitHub182> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6744: build: disable -Wself-assign (master...2015_10_clang_self_assignment_warning) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6744 04:44 < wumpus> GODDAMNIT, I did merge the UTF BOM in 5f34a25, these things are harder to get rid of than viruses 04:48 < wumpus> the mind boggles, what use are byte order marks, it's not like UTF-8 has different endiannesses 04:57 < btcdrak> we really need a basic CS checker as part of the CI process 04:59 < btcdrak> https://scrutinizer-ci.com is free for OSS projects. It integrates with Github like travis 04:59 < btcdrak> and does CS checks afaik 05:07 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:07 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:07 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:31 < GitHub76> [bitcoin] randy-waterhouse opened pull request #6760: Changed qa/pull-tester/run-bitcoind-for-test.sh.in to non-executable mode. (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6760 05:33 < jgarzik> CS = coding style? clang works as CS checker. Using that is The Plan - reformat the source code according to the already-chosen clang style at some flag day. Then checks from that point can be automated. 05:47 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-228-102-100.ip191.fastwebnet.it] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 05:53 < CodeShark> speaking of which, how are we on the C++11/C++14 stuff? 05:53 < CodeShark> I guess backports make that very hard now 06:03 < jonasschnelli> github merge script does use git@github.com: instead of https://github.com, wouldn't the later be our preferred way. I assume git@github.com uses plaintext communication. Sure. commits are signed, but still https might be the preferred way? 06:06 < jgarzik> jonasschnelli, git@github is ssh 06:06 < jgarzik> jonasschnelli, git:// is plaintext 06:06 < jonasschnelli> jgarzik: Ah. Right.. Thanks. I missed the @. nm 06:07 -!- pigeons [~pigeons@94.242.209.214] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 06:08 -!- pigeons [~pigeons@94.242.209.214] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:08 -!- pigeons is now known as Guest22631 06:22 < btcdrak> jgarzik: yes, a codestyle checker - it doesnt need to be on nazi mode, just catch things like whitespace, UTF8 BOM, and basic style. Having it as part of the pull request CI (which includes Travis) makes it much easier for contributors to get it right first and makes less work for reviewers). 06:25 -!- mtrythall [~mtrythall@pool-108-36-102-29.phlapa.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:26 < CodeShark> jonasschnelli: which one's your pride and joy right now? I'll have a look 06:27 < CodeShark> PR that is 06:27 -!- mtrythall [~mtrythall@pool-108-36-102-29.phlapa.fios.verizon.net] has left #bitcoin-core-dev ["Textual IRC Client: http://www.textualapp.com/"] 06:28 < jonasschnelli> CodeShark: I keep my +1 credit because non of my PR are merge-or-review-ready state. I still like to get the bip32 patch into 0.12. Will come back to your offer soon. :) 06:28 < jonasschnelli> *are in 06:30 -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@195.138.228.82] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:30 -!- adam3us [~Adium@195.138.228.20] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 06:36 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 06:40 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 06:42 < jgarzik> btcdrak, having a "fail unless clang-CS compliant" or "auto format tree to clang-CS style" policy fixes a lot of those issues automatically 07:00 < jonasschnelli> clang auto-format was rejected because clang-format wasn't deterministic enough (event with same version of clang-format) IIRC 07:07 -!- droark [~droark@caraway.whatbox.ca] has quit [Quit: Later.] 07:11 < jonasschnelli> s/event/even 07:41 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 07:53 -!- CodeShark [CodeShark@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has quit [] 08:15 -!- jl2012_ [~jl2012@119246245241.ctinets.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:15 -!- jl2012 [~jl2012@unaffiliated/jl2012] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 08:16 -!- Guest22631 is now known as pigeons 08:35 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 08:37 -!- stonecoldpat1 is now known as stonecoldpat 08:43 -!- fkhan [weechat@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-gprnhghujoehtoec] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 08:49 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 08:56 -!- fkhan [weechat@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-cfznpurriqqzmrdj] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:22 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 09:25 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:25 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Client Quit] 09:31 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 09:32 -!- adam3us1 [~Adium@195.138.228.82] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 09:33 -!- adam3us [~Adium@c3-219.i07-1.onvol.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:07 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:38 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:43 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 10:43 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 10:59 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:08 -!- d_t [~textual@c-50-136-139-144.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:10 < GitHub152> [bitcoin] paveljanik opened pull request #6761: [Trivial] Remove UTF-8 BOM [skip ci] (master...remove_bom) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6761 11:11 -!- rubensayshi [~ruben@91.206.81.13] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 11:18 < GitHub72> [bitcoin] paveljanik opened pull request #6762: tests-config.sh is superseded by tests_config.py [skip ci] (master...qatest_gitignore) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6762 11:32 -!- ParadoxSpiral_ [~ParadoxSp@p508B96C4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 11:35 -!- ParadoxSpiral [~ParadoxSp@p508B95A3.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds] 11:57 < GitHub85> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6761: [Trivial] Remove UTF-8 BOM [skip ci] (master...remove_bom) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6761 12:23 < GitHub107> [bitcoin] paveljanik opened pull request #6763: [Trivial] The Bitcoin Core project is releasing Bitcoin Core, not Bitcoin. (master...trivial_Bitcoin_vs_BitcoinCore_fix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6763 12:23 -!- mm_1 [bnc33@bnc33.nitrado.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 12:59 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:05 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 13:07 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 13:31 -!- sipa [~pw@unaffiliated/sipa1024] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 14:23 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 15:02 -!- randy-waterhouse [~kiwigb@opentransactions/dev/randy-waterhouse] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 15:03 -!- PaulCape_ [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has quit [Quit: .] 15:03 -!- PaulCapestany [~PaulCapes@204.28.124.82] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 15:26 -!- n0n0__ [~n0n0@x4d067290.dyn.telefonica.de] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds] 15:28 -!- mode/#bitcoin-core-dev [+o sipa] by ChanServ 16:01 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:07 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 16:28 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:45 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 16:51 -!- PRab [~chatzilla@2601:40a:8000:8f9b:ecff:c568:dd9:bcb8] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 16:54 -!- d_t [~textual@c-50-136-139-144.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] 17:44 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Quit: Leaving] 17:44 -!- CodeShark [CodeShark@cpe-76-167-237-202.san.res.rr.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 17:45 < gmaxwell> univale interface change sadness of the day: listunspent 0 9999999999 [stuff] fails because 9999999999 is too big. 17:46 < gmaxwell> I expect this to bite some number of users. 17:46 < gmaxwell> should probably be release noted that your 'infinite' values may be too large 17:55 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 18:00 -!- BashCo [~BashCo@unaffiliated/bashco] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 18:00 < jgarzik> gmaxwell, or just s/get_int/get_int64/ 18:03 <@sipa> yeah, sounds like a bug in the conversion of the bitcoin to univalue, not a problem with univalue itself 18:04 < gmaxwell> thats not a bitcoin value, it's an integer (confirmation depth). It could be 64bit. 18:04 < jgarzik> we know 18:05 < jgarzik> bug in conversion of bitcoin code to univalue 18:05 < jgarzik> Let's see if 'git blame' works through all our refactors... 18:06 <@sipa> that code has hardly been touched by refactors :) 18:07 < jgarzik> 2 major code movements to unwind so far 18:08 < jgarzik> Though I'm guessing the problem is more subtle -- json_spirit code probably used get_int() 18:09 <@sipa> that would explain 18:10 <@sipa> did get_int behave differently in json spirit? 18:10 < jgarzik> that's what I'm investigating now 18:11 <@sipa> cool 18:11 <@sipa> i've requested botbot logging for this channel, btw 18:12 <@sipa> (as suggested by btcdrak) 18:12 < jgarzik> json_spirit implements get_int() as: return static_cast< int >( get_int64() ); 18:13 * jgarzik is a static_cast<> newbie - I wonder if that means an out-of-range behavior is different 18:16 < jgarzik> i.e. static_cast<> triggers "new_type foo(int64)" which results in a INT_MAX value for out of range, versus an exception thrown for univalue 18:29 < jgarzik> gmaxwell, Does this fix? http://gtf.org/garzik/bitcoin/patch.univalue_get_int 18:30 < gmaxwell> jgarzik: I dunno that changing it is the right thing to do? new behavior might be better? 18:30 < jgarzik> gmaxwell, I think new behavior is better, more type specific 18:31 < jgarzik> gmaxwell, However checking that patch would provide a quick field fix + ascertain that it is indeed the problem 18:31 < gmaxwell> k would be glad to test. 18:31 < jgarzik> gmaxwell, every .get_int() would need to be re-examined 18:33 < gmaxwell> er, I am currently diverged from master; so uh. hm. 18:36 < jgarzik> gmaxwell, the file paths may have shuffled, but the files & code are likely to be applicable 18:37 < rusty> sipa: botbot.me people finally got back to me about logging #lightning-dev; will ping them about this too when we close the loop. 18:44 -!- ParadoxSpiral_ [~ParadoxSp@p508B96C4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:46 < GitHub13> [bitcoin] sandakersmann opened pull request #6766: [Trivial] Consistent use of lower case letters (master...lower_case) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6766 18:51 < GitHub62> [bitcoin] sandakersmann opened pull request #6767: [Trivial] Missing "Core" in header (master...missing_core) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6767 18:58 < morcos> maaku: i didn't understand your response on email about decreasing granualarity being a soft fork? 19:01 -!- rusty [~rusty@pdpc/supporter/bronze/rusty] has left #bitcoin-core-dev [] 19:03 < morcos> maybe i'm confused as to what decreasing granularity means, but it seems to me if you go from 8 second granularity to 1 second granularity, you need 3 more bits and its a soft fork? if you decide you don't need 1 second granularity, and want to use those 3 bits for something else, that would be hard fork 19:04 < morcos> so why not set aside more of the low order bits to start with and use only like 64 second granularity. then we'd have 1 high order bit for a different scheme and 11 or 14 low order bits for soft forking within the scheme 19:12 < GitHub146> [bitcoin] sandakersmann closed pull request #6767: [Trivial] Missing "Core" in header (master...missing_core) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6767 19:26 -!- d_t [~textual@c-50-136-139-144.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 19:50 < maaku> morcos: my terminology was reversed, sorry 19:50 < maaku> but going from 1s -> 2^n seconds is a soft fork 19:50 < morcos> maaku: why? 19:51 < morcos> doesn't that depend on what the interpretation of those bits is in the new rules 19:51 < maaku> morcos: you round up the relative lock-time to 2^n 19:51 < morcos> the new rules will say that 19:52 < morcos> but if the old rules use 1s, then something that was valid under the old rules, may or may not be valid under the new rules 19:52 < maaku> right 19:52 < maaku> that's a soft-fork 19:53 < morcos> oh, did i just confuse myself 19:53 < maaku> i think you're getting tripped up over a different concern -- if you change the meaning of those bits, old clients might be setting them without knowing that they are assigning meaning 19:54 < maaku> but that too can be managed, either by making sure it is relatively harmless under the new rules, or by soft-forking in the "round up" rule, making those bits non-standard, letting infrastructure upgrade, and then soft-forking new meaning 19:55 < morcos> so what exactly is the round up rule? 19:55 < morcos> if we decide to use a few less bits, then you'll shift by less bits and then add 1 and then multiply by 2^n? 19:56 < morcos> less = n 19:56 < maaku> let's say we recover 3 from the time version, then 0 is a lock-time of 0, 1-8 are a lock-time of 8 19:56 < maaku> *recover 3 bits 19:56 < morcos> but how does that work 19:56 < morcos> because don't 1 and 0 look the same 19:56 < morcos> 0-7 look the same 19:57 < maaku> the usual bitfiddling (n + 7) & ~0x7 19:57 < maaku> or somesuch 19:59 < morcos> i'll freely admit i'm too tired to convince even myself i know what i'm talking about, but perhaps it would help if you could write up a quick demonstration 20:00 < morcos> also i didn't really think about how it ties into CSV? 20:01 -!- d_t [~textual@c-50-136-139-144.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] 20:01 < maaku> python -c 'for i in xrange(16): print "%d\t%d" % (i, (i+7) & ~0x7)' 20:01 < maaku> http://0bin.net/paste/UHDsIjXHKean074O#OSrQQUnwoDJQeJ586RyQaAcxxmrE41tuLzBrjk0kj11 20:02 < morcos> ha ha, yeah i got what you were saying, but the point is if you're no longer using those low 3 order bits how can you do that, they now mean something different 20:03 < maaku> OH ok. I thought there must be a miscommunication. It's not THAT late there ;) 20:03 < maaku> I mean you would just do that for the purpose of the relative lock-time check 20:05 < maaku> so under the new rules, within LockTime() only, it does this round-up rule when calculating relative lock-time 20:05 < morcos> but you can't, if someone wants to encode 000 in the 3 bits for the new rule and 0 for a lock time. they will have 0000 = 0 for CSV . on the other hand, someone who wanted to encode 111 for the new rule woudl have 0111 = 8 for CSV . but they both wanted 0 for CSV 20:05 < morcos> how could someone encode 111 for the new rule, but still have a 0 for CSV 20:06 < morcos> so perhaps thats a soft fork in that its more restrictive, but they can no longer choose the values they wanted? 20:06 < maaku> you can't. but is that an issue? 20:06 -!- d_t [~textual@c-50-136-139-144.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:07 < maaku> i mean you could round up the entire range so 0-7 means 8, 8-15 means 16 20:07 < maaku> but then you lose the ability to specify zero lock time at all 20:07 < maaku> for CSV, it does straight integer comparisons. it doesn't even mask off the unused low order bits 20:07 < morcos> well thats what i'm claiming is that depending on what you wanted to use the other 3 bits for you might lose that 20:07 < morcos> so i agree rounding up is a soft fork 20:07 < morcos> if you lose some bits 20:08 < morcos> why is adding bits for finer time granularity a hard fork 20:10 < maaku> well now that we've had this conversation, I suppose you could add bits, just not to the first range 20:10 < GitHub89> [bitcoin] jmcorgan opened pull request #6768: zmq: update docs to reflect feature is compiled in automatically (master...update-zmq-docs) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6768 20:11 < morcos> first range? you mean high order bits? 20:12 < maaku> let's say you went from 8s -> 1s 20:13 < maaku> you could do that by saying 0 is now a relative lock-time of 8, 1 (previously still 0: 0.001) is now a relative lock-time of 9, 2 (0.010) is 10, etc. 20:13 < morcos> i'm not sure i understand why you don't mask off the lower order bits for CSV. wouldn't that make it harder potentially to make some other soft fork out of them later. 20:13 -!- d_t [~textual@c-50-136-139-144.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: My MacBook has gone to sleep. ZZZzzz…] 20:14 < maaku> the bits were originally added by a suggestion from gmaxwell who was considering them to represent a share chain 20:14 < morcos> i don't understand why you have to round up if you're adding bits... 0 is 0. 0.001 was 0 now its 1 and so on.. why do you have to start at 8? 20:14 < maaku> in that case you could even have sub-block granularity 20:15 < maaku> but you're right, masking them should be strictly safe to do 20:15 < maaku> *safely soft-fork upgradable 20:16 < morcos> i guess i'm viewing the low order bits (if they're masked off for all operations now) as something that is available for any kind of soft fork we want in the future while still have BIP 68 in effect 20:17 < morcos> and the high order bit represents a way to selectively have BIP 68 or some other use of nSequence 20:18 < maaku> correct 20:18 < morcos> so to me, if we're pretty sure we like BIP 68, then having only 1 high order bit is good enough, but we should leave as many low order bits as we can. i hadn't thought about the rounding up to get rid of some bits, but that doesn't work well if CSV is checking them anyway. 20:19 < maaku> morcos: it works the same I think 20:19 -!- d_t [~textual@c-50-136-139-144.hsd1.ca.comcast.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 20:19 < morcos> i'm sorry for chiming in with an opinion late in this process, i wasn't really paying much attention earlier. but to the extent we preserve as much flexibility for the future as we can, it helps address petertodd's concerns 20:20 < maaku> I'm all for increased flexibility 20:20 < maaku> just trying to map out the ramifications here myself 20:21 < morcos> yeah i mean maybe even with CSV checking all the bits, as long as you round up enough you're ok, but i think it makes sense to make sure we're not losing any edge cases. I suppose a relative time lock of 0 seconds has no benefit because you can always use a 0 block lock? 20:21 < morcos> but it just seems cleaner to me to start with less bits and add more if we need the granularity than the other way around 20:24 < maaku> thank you for calling me on this; my thinking on the soft-fork vs hard-fork was backwords 20:25 < maaku> I just worked out some examples and it is a soft-fork to add bits 20:27 < morcos> just glad i wasn't totally off my rocker 20:27 < maaku> morcos: my proposal would then be 16-bits of precision: block-height granularity of 1 block, block-time granularity of 512s 20:28 < maaku> in both cases up to a year of relative lock-time 20:29 < morcos> yeah i mean i think that sounds nicer to me, but i'm not very familiar with the use cases 20:30 < maaku> well sub-600s lock-times are suspect anyway, because block interval and variance 20:31 < morcos> so with CSV it's valid if they are the same right? so yeah then it doesn't matter if you're including all the low order bits when comparing 20:33 < morcos> oh wait 20:33 < maaku> i think you would get the most flexibility by masking there as well 20:33 < morcos> yeah 20:36 < morcos> i wonder if it would be simpler just to reserve all the bits on the high order side 20:36 < morcos> you can always do the same thing with those bits, just a bit more complicated 20:38 < morcos> anyway, got to call it a night 20:39 < maaku> g'night 20:52 < GitHub183> [bitcoin] gmaxwell opened pull request #6769: Test LowS in standardness, removes nuisance malleability vector. (master...no_nuisance_malleability) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6769 21:59 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-72-74-133-29.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer] 21:59 -!- goregrind [~goregrind@unaffiliated/goregrind] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds] 22:02 -!- Squidicuz [~squid@pool-72-74-133-29.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:03 -!- helo [~helo@unaffiliated/helo] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds] 22:03 -!- fkhan [weechat@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-cfznpurriqqzmrdj] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds] 22:03 -!- Apocalyptic [~Apocalypt@unaffiliated/apocalyptic] has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds] 22:04 -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds] 22:05 -!- helo [~helo@unaffiliated/helo] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:06 -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:09 -!- Apocalyptic [~Apocalypt@unaffiliated/apocalyptic] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 22:16 -!- fkhan [weechat@gateway/vpn/mullvad/x-ndcobfptkpdhblbm] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:05 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:05 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@79-98-72-216.sys-data.com] has quit [Changing host] 23:05 -!- paveljanik [~paveljani@unaffiliated/paveljanik] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev 23:53 -!- alpalp [6836eb1c@gateway/web/cgi-irc/kiwiirc.com/ip.104.54.235.28] has quit [Quit: http://www.kiwiirc.com/ - A hand crafted IRC client]