On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 02:27:10PM -0700, Joseph Poon via bitcoin-dev wrote: > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 09:21:36AM -0700, Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > > If anyone feels strongly about this, please speak up. > > > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:37 AM, Jorge Tim??n < > > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > > > I repeated my nit on https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/179 > > I am also indifferent, but also dislike technical debt. > > It should maybe be noted for those who wish to do/write-code-for mempool > transaction selection (irrespective of one's opinion on it) that lower > is better, since transactions with shorter relative locks are > transactions with "higher priority".
ACK on removing the inversion of nSequence from what would be human readable. I don't want to spend the rest of my life mentally having to subtrace from 0xFFFFFFFF :) -- 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 00000000000000000402fe6fb9ad613c93e12bddfc6ec02a2bd92f002050594d
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
