public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] CLTV opcode allocation; long-term plans?
Date: Sat, 9 May 2015 05:12:01 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150509091201.GA15088@savin.petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzs3D=6pNOQhU3ubi6=C8javRtwL0VuGFWvU+6SiuB0YWg@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1312 bytes --]

On Tue, May 05, 2015 at 01:54:33AM +0100, Btc Drak wrote:
> > 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.

Done!

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/5496#issuecomment-100454263

-- 
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000012c438a597ad15df697888be579f4f818a30517cd60fbdc8

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 650 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-09  9:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-04  5:07 [Bitcoin-development] CLTV opcode allocation; long-term plans? Peter Todd
2015-05-05  0:54 ` Btc Drak
2015-05-09  9:12   ` Peter Todd [this message]
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=20150509091201.GA15088@savin.petertodd.org \
    --to=pete@petertodd.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=btcdrak@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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