Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Alternative name for CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY (BIP112)

From: Peter Todd <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2015 17:25:56 -0500

On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 01:32:58PM -0800, Eric Lombrozo via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> After a little more though (and some comments from aj), I realize that the opcode naming convention is actually CHECK <condition > VERIFY.
> 
> Therefore, the full opcode name should be CHECKRELATIVELOCKTIMEVERIFY.
> 
> However, this name is ridiculously long, so at least some part will require abbreviation.
> 
> In typical script example usage, most sensible seems to be to abbreviate both CLTV and CRLTV.

...and CRLTV is hard to visually distinguish from CLTV. :(

You know, calling it AGEVERIFY is short and sweet.

-- 
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000ef246c814f8cb8c1a26bc3c6cb1286bdbc5f4140ed3fc79