Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Btc Drak
This is a pretty good example about refactoring discipline as well as premature/over optimisation. We all want to see more modular code, but the first steps should just be to relocate blocks of code so everything is more logically organised in smaller files (especially for consensus critical

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Jeff Garzik
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Btc Drak btcd...@gmail.com wrote: We all want to see more modular code, but the first steps should just be to relocate blocks of code so everything is more logically organised in smaller files (especially for consensus critical code). Refactoring should come

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Gregory Maxwell
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote: [snip] Pull-req #4890², specifically commit c7829ea7, changed the This change was authored more than three months ago and merged more than two months ago. [And also, AFAICT, prior to you authoring BIP65] I didn't participate

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Wladimir
While it would be nice to have a library encapsulating the consensus code, this shouldn't come at the cost of safety, especially when the actual users of that library or their needs is still uncertain. While I agree that it shouldn't come at unreasonable risk, my whole reason for

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Cory Fields
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:20 AM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Btc Drak btcd...@gmail.com wrote: We all want to see more modular code, but the first steps should just be to relocate blocks of code so everything is more logically organised in smaller

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Cory Fields
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Peter Todd p...@petertodd.org wrote: BtcDrak was working on rebasing my CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY¹ patch to master a few days ago and found a fairly large design change that makes merging it currently impossible. Pull-req #4890², specifically commit c7829ea7,

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Jeff Garzik
If code movement is not compressed into a tight time window, code movement becomes a constant stream during development. A constant stream of code movement is a constant stream of patch breakage, for any patch or project not yet in-tree. The result is to increase the work and cost on any

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Recent EvalScript() changes mean CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY can't be merged

2014-12-15 Thread Cory Fields
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 2:35 PM, Jeff Garzik jgar...@bitpay.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Cory Fields li...@coryfields.com wrote: That's exactly what happened during the modularization process, with the exception that the code movement and refactors happened in parallel rather