From: "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@blockstream.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Speedy covenants (OP_CAT2)
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 19:33:36 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMZUoK=stZaPcTNfC_KdOxbQp=VyORwC3osSm3sTeQ0WZ4ejYQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220513214347.GA2463@erisian.com.au>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 838 bytes --]
On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 5:43 PM Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> wrote:
> For any specific opcode proposal, I think you still want to consider
>
> 1) how much you can do with it
> 2) how efficient it is to validate (and thus how cheap it is to use)
> 3) how easy it is to make it do what you want
> 4) how helpful it is at preventing bugs
> 5) how clean and maintainable the validation code is
>
> I guess to me CTV and APO are weakest at (1); CAT/CSFS falls down on
> (3) and (4); OP_TX is probably weakest at (5) and maybe not as good as
> we'd like at (3) and (4)?
>
FWIW, I think the rmain reasons to do CAT+CSFS is to validate oracle
messages and pubkey delegation. The ability to covenants would be
secondary and would mostly serve to get us some real user data about what
sort of covenants users find especially valuable.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1182 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-13 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-06 22:30 [bitcoin-dev] Speedy covenants (OP_CAT2) Jorge Timón
2022-05-07 3:06 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-05-07 3:52 ` vjudeu
2022-05-07 13:31 ` Jorge Timón
2022-05-11 15:25 ` alicexbt
2022-05-11 16:03 ` vjudeu
2022-05-07 13:27 ` Jorge Timón
2022-05-07 14:08 ` ZmnSCPxj
[not found] ` <CABm2gDo1wTOoWcNgJ4mUgSB3KCtBSnjqe3nwVBSL+7=ziDJ==w@mail.gmail.com>
2022-05-07 22:28 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-05-08 2:03 ` Nadav Ivgi
2022-05-08 2:19 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-05-11 10:57 ` vjudeu
2022-05-11 11:42 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-05-11 19:41 ` Russell O'Connor
2022-05-12 3:07 ` ZmnSCPxj
2022-05-12 10:48 ` Russell O'Connor
2022-05-13 21:43 ` Anthony Towns
2022-05-13 23:33 ` Russell O'Connor [this message]
2022-05-14 13:32 ` Erik Aronesty
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='CAMZUoK=stZaPcTNfC_KdOxbQp=VyORwC3osSm3sTeQ0WZ4ejYQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=roconnor@blockstream.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
/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