Re: [bitcoin-dev] Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks

2022-03-22 Thread ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev
Good morning aj, > On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 05:37:03AM +, ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > > Subject: Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks > > (Have you considered applying a jit or some other compression algorithm > to your emails?) > > > Microcode For Bitcoin

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks

2022-03-22 Thread Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 05:37:03AM +, ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Subject: Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks (Have you considered applying a jit or some other compression algorithm to your emails?) > Microcode For Bitcoin SCRIPT >

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks

2022-03-22 Thread ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev
Good morning again Russell, > Good morning Russell, > > > Thanks for the clarification. > > You don't think referring to the microcode via its hash, effectively using > > 32-byte encoding of opcodes, is still rather long winded? For that matter, since an entire microcode represents a language

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks

2022-03-22 Thread ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev
Good morning Russell, > Thanks for the clarification. > > You don't think referring to the microcode via its hash, effectively using > 32-byte encoding of opcodes, is still rather long winded? A microcode is a *mapping* of `OP_` codes to a variable-length sequence of `UOP_` micro-opcodes. So a

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks

2022-03-22 Thread Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev
Thanks for the clarification. You don't think referring to the microcode via its hash, effectively using 32-byte encoding of opcodes, is still rather long winded? On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 12:23 PM ZmnSCPxj wrote: > Good morning Russell, > > > Setting aside my thoughts that something like

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks

2022-03-22 Thread ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev
Good morning Russell, > Setting aside my thoughts that something like Simplicity would make a better > platform than Bitcoin Script (due to expression operating on a more narrow > interface than the entire stack (I'm looking at you OP_DEPTH)) there is an > issue with namespace management. > >

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks

2022-03-22 Thread Russell O'Connor via bitcoin-dev
Setting aside my thoughts that something like Simplicity would make a better platform than Bitcoin Script (due to expression operating on a more narrow interface than the entire stack (I'm looking at you OP_DEPTH)) there is an issue with namespace management. If I understand correctly, your

[bitcoin-dev] Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks

2022-03-21 Thread ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev
Good morning list, It is entirely possible that I have gotten into the deep end and am now drowning in insanity, but here goes Subject: Beyond Jets: Microcode: Consensus-Critical Jets Without Softforks Introduction Recent (Early 2022) discussions on the bitcoin-dev mailing