--- Day changed Thu Jan 04 2018
05:33 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
05:35 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #secp256k1     
05:40 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]     
05:50 -!- arubi [~ese168@gateway/tor-sasl/ese168] has joined #secp256k1     
06:06 -!- lukedashjr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has joined #secp256k1     
06:09 -!- luke-jr [~luke-jr@unaffiliated/luke-jr] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]     
06:10 -!- lukedashjr is now known as luke-jr     
06:23 -!- echonaut [~echonaut@46.101.192.134] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]     
06:23 -!- echonaut [~echonaut@46.101.192.134] has joined #secp256k1     
07:25 -!- ofek [~Ofekmeist@pool-68-134-41-20.bltmmd.fios.verizon.net] has joined #secp256k1     
07:27 < ofek> will the performance penalty of Intel's Meltdown fix affect libsecp256k1 much?
07:32 < nsh> to the extent that there are context switches and syscalls, yes
07:33 < nsh> pure computation from memory should be largely unaffected
07:44 -!- adiabat [~adiabat@45.63.20.152] has quit [Quit: WeeChat 1.4]     
07:50 < ofek> nsh, ok, thanks!
08:06 < nsh> np     
09:46 < sipa> there are no syscalls in libsecp256k1, except during context setup
12:07 -!- eck [~eck@fsf/member/eck] has quit [Quit: we out here]     
21:35 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-116-35.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]     
21:37 -!- instagibbs [~instagibb@pool-100-15-116-35.washdc.fios.verizon.net] has joined #secp256k1