From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Y61XQ-00085v-N4 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:29:00 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.223.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.223.170; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-ie0-f170.google.com; Received: from mail-ie0-f170.google.com ([209.85.223.170]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Y61XP-0004Vp-Nd for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:29:00 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id rd18so14077237iec.1 for ; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:28:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.42.25.144 with SMTP id a16mr48537024icc.66.1419964134484; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:28:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.107.16.30 with HTTP; Tue, 30 Dec 2014 10:28:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <54A2D1F4.9050306@certimix.com> References: <54A1A99E.1020604@certimix.com> <54A2D1F4.9050306@certimix.com> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:28:54 +0000 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Sergio Lerner Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Y61XP-0004Vp-Nd Cc: bitcoin-development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP: Voluntary deposit bonds X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:29:00 -0000 On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Sergio Lerner wrote: > Slight off-topic: > That looks like an abuse of the VM. Even P2SH is an abuse of the VM. > Gavin's OP_EVAL (hard-fork) should had been chosen. I'm taking about a > simple change that goes along the lines of Satoshi's original design. > Bitcoin was a beautiful design, and extra complexity is making it ugly. > We need Bitcoin to be simple to understand for new programmers so they > can keep the project going. It doesn't help the project that one needs > to be a guru to code for Bitcoin. Sergio there is no "abuse" there, OP_NOP3 in that case would be redefined to OP_COINBASE_FOO_CONSISTENCY. (I say FOO because it's not clear what rule you actually hope to apply there.) What you suggested has no purpose by itself: it would need an additional change which overlays functionality in order to actually do something. Such a change would likely be "ugly"-- it's easy to be elegant when you do nothing.