Re: [PATCH 06/23] refs: use `size_t` indexes when iterating over ref transaction updates

[Stefan Beller]

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

Now this would want to have some selling words for it?
I do not see an advantage of this patch as-is.

I mean technically we don't need a sign, so we use that extra bit
to be able to process transactions up to twice the size. But I doubt
that is the real reason. I'll read on, maybe a later patch will explain
why we do this here.

Stefan