--- Day changed Tue Dec 15 2015
00:09 -!- midnightmagic [~midnightm@unaffiliated/midnightmagic] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
02:14 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #secp256k1
02:47 -!- btcdrak [uid115429@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-pqdlaxjmaavepkaj] has joined #secp256k1
03:51 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
03:53 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #secp256k1
04:26 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
04:31 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #secp256k1
04:53 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
04:54 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #secp256k1
05:29 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
05:36 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has joined #secp256k1
05:36 -!- GAit [~GAit@2-230-161-158.ip202.fastwebnet.it] has quit [Client Quit]
06:18 -!- midnightmagic [~midnightm@unaffiliated/midnightmagic] has joined #secp256k1
12:12 -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Excess Flood]
12:12 -!- Luke-Jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #secp256k1
14:02 < sipa> gmaxwell: care to look at #367?
14:55 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has joined #secp256k1
15:02 < sipa> request for opinions: maintain Schnorr pubkey recovery by allowing users to pass in a pubkey hash function for sign/verify (and make the e value commit to the pubkey hash), or drop pubkey recovery and make e commit to the pubkey directly?
16:08 < gmaxwell> sipa: I've been testing 367. Might be a bit slow (though I didn't compare to the old versions).
16:09 < gmaxwell> sipa: I like being able to support it. It need not add a lot of complexity for people not using that, I think, if a null pointer means a sane default.
16:11 < sipa> i don't like that it effectively introduces a family of signature schemes rather than a single one
16:17 < gmaxwell> Is it any more than ECDSA is a family of schemes since the outer hash isn't part of it?
16:20 < sipa> yes
16:20 < sipa> you can define ECDSA as taking the msg hash as input
16:21 < sipa> you can't move the abstraction out of the variable part here, except by saying that you take the pubkey hash as input, but then the trivial way to use it is to just pass 0
16:21 < sipa> the pubkey hash as separate from the pubkey itself
18:13 -!- belcher [~user@unaffiliated/belcher] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]