Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 174 thoughts

2018-06-26 Thread Achow101 via bitcoin-dev
Hi, On June 26, 2018 8:33 AM, matejcik via bitcoin-dev wrote: > ​​ > > hello, > > in general, I agree with my colleague Tomas, the proposed changes are > > good and achieve the most important things that we wanted. We'll review > > the proposal in more detail later. > > For now a couple mi

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 174 thoughts

2018-06-26 Thread Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 8:33 AM, matejcik via bitcoin-dev wrote: > I'm still going to argue against the key-value model though. > > It's true that this is not significant in terms of space. But I'm more > concerned about human readability, i.e., confusing future implementers. > At this point, the

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 174 thoughts

2018-06-26 Thread Marek Palatinus via bitcoin-dev
On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 6:58 PM, William Casarin via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > seems a bit overkill for how simple the format is, and pulling in a > large dependency just for this is a bit silly. Although making it > protobuf-compatible is an interesting idea,

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 174 thoughts

2018-06-26 Thread William Casarin via bitcoin-dev
matejcik via bitcoin-dev writes: > BIP174 is a ad-hoc format, simple to parse by hand; but that results > in _having to_ parse it by hand. In contrast, protobuf has a huge > collection of implementations that will do the job of sorting record > types into relevant struct fields, proper delimiting

[bitcoin-dev] BIP039 - How to add a Portuguese wordlist?

2018-06-26 Thread Breno Brito via bitcoin-dev
Hello, Since Portuguese is considered the 6th most spoken language in the world and is an official language in 10 countries, I'd like to propose the expansion of the BIP039 wordlist to Portuguese or help if someone had already proposed it. What should I do? Regards, Breno ___

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 174 thoughts

2018-06-26 Thread matejcik via bitcoin-dev
hello, in general, I agree with my colleague Tomas, the proposed changes are good and achieve the most important things that we wanted. We'll review the proposal in more detail later. For now a couple minor things I have run into: - valid test vector 2 ("one P2PKH input and one P2SH-P2WPKH input

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BetterHash status

2018-06-26 Thread Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev
Things go into production when people decide to adopt them, not before. You're welcome to contribute to the implementation at https://github.com/TheBlueMatt/mining-proxy On June 26, 2018 2:32:06 PM UTC, "Casciano, Anthony via bitcoin-dev" wrote: >What is the status of Matt Corallo's "Bette

[bitcoin-dev] BetterHash status

2018-06-26 Thread Casciano, Anthony via bitcoin-dev
What is the status of Matt Corallo's "BetterHash" BIP?? I recommend it goes into production sooner than later. Any 2nd's ? Thanks in advance! Tony Cash ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundati