From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail•com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] CLTV opcode allocation; long-term plans?
Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 01:54:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADJgMzs3D=6pNOQhU3ubi6=C8javRtwL0VuGFWvU+6SiuB0YWg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150504050715.GA18856@savin.petertodd.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1437 bytes --]
On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 6:07 AM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org> wrote:
> Matt Corallo brought up¹ the issue of OP_NOP scarcity on the mempool
> only CLTV pull-req²:
>
> "I like merging this, but doing both CLTV things in one swoop would be
> really nice. Certainly if we're gonna use one of the precious few
> OP_NOPs we have we might as well make it more flexible."
>
> [snip]
> That said, if people have strong feelings about this, I would be willing
> to make OP_CLTV work as follows:
>
> <nLockTime> 1 OP_CLTV
>
> Where the 1 selects absolute mode, and all others act as OP_NOP's. A
> future relative CLTV could then be a future soft-fork implemented as
> follows:
>
> <relative nLockTime> 2 OP_CLTV
>
> On the bad side it'd be two or three days of work to rewrite all the
> existing tests and example code and update the BIP, and (slightly) gets
> us away from the well-tested existing implementation. It also may
> complicate the codebase compared to sticking with just doing a Script
> v2.0, with the additional execution environment data required for v2.0
> scripts cleanly separated out. But all in all, the above isn't too big
> of a deal.
Adding a parameter to OP_CLTV makes it much more flexible and is the most
economic use of precious NOPs.
The extra time required is ok and it would be good to make this change to
the PR in time for the feature freeze.
Drak
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2273 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-05-05 0:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-05-04 5:07 Peter Todd
2015-05-05 0:54 ` Btc Drak [this message]
2015-05-09 9:12 ` Peter Todd
2015-05-12 19:16 ` Jorge Timón
2015-05-12 19:23 ` Pieter Wuille
2015-05-12 19:30 ` Btc Drak
2015-05-12 20:38 ` Luke Dashjr
2015-05-12 21:01 ` Peter Todd
2015-05-13 0:38 ` Jorge Timón
2015-05-07 1:35 ` Rusty Russell
2015-05-07 17:17 ` Peter Todd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CADJgMzs3D=6pNOQhU3ubi6=C8javRtwL0VuGFWvU+6SiuB0YWg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=btcdrak@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox