MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <bf96c2fb-2e2e-a47f-e59f-87e56d83eca3@mattcorallo.com>
	<CAMZUoK=1kgZLR1YZ+cJgzwmEOwrABYFs=2Ri=xGX=BCr+w=VQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<6bb308f5-f478-d5ec-064f-e4972709f29c@mattcorallo.com>
	<D2014BB7-1EFC-4604-ACF6-3C5AC74B6FC0@sprovoost.nl>
In-Reply-To: <D2014BB7-1EFC-4604-ACF6-3C5AC74B6FC0@sprovoost.nl>
From: "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@blockstream.io>
Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 13:29:15 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMZUoKmKvQXLvmUuts4+XieSisL6bHQe0mg=65C7t+t3ApBRQA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sjors Provoost <sjors@sprovoost.nl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000efd01c0583ad845f"
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] OP_CODESEPARATOR Re: BIP Proposal: The Great
 Consensus Cleanup
Precedence: list

--000000000000efd01c0583ad845f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

Hi Sjors,

On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 2:12 PM Sjors Provoost <sjors@sprovoost.nl> wrote:

> Transaction weight currently doesn't consider OP codes, it only considers
> if bytes are part of the witness. Changing that to something more akin to
> Ethereums gas pricing sounds too complicated to even consider.
>

I did say per executed OP_CODESEPARATOR, but upon reflection, I agree that
we'd like to know the weight without execution.  I think counting the
number of occurrences of OP_CODESEPARATOR (perhaps at the same time we
count OP_CHECKSIG operations?) is a reasonable compromise, and increasing
the weight according to my proposed formula based on that count (ideally
we'd take OP_IF branches into account).


> I would also like to believe that whoever went through the trouble of
> using OP_CODESEPARATOR reads this list.
>

I wish this were the case too, but I don't think it is reasonable to assume
that (even maaku isn't subscribed
<https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15482#issuecomment-469836918>),
and I don't even think it is fair to assume such a someone necessarily even
speaks English.

--000000000000efd01c0583ad845f
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Hi Sjors,<br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><di=
v dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Fri, Mar 8, 2019 at 2:12 PM Sjors Pro=
voost &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:sjors@sprovoost.nl" target=3D"_blank">sjors@spr=
ovoost.nl</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding=
-left:1ex">
Transaction weight currently doesn&#39;t consider OP codes, it only conside=
rs if bytes are part of the witness. Changing that to something more akin t=
o Ethereums gas pricing sounds too complicated to even consider.<br></block=
quote><div><br></div><div>I did say per executed OP_CODESEPARATOR, but upon=
 reflection, I agree that we&#39;d like to know the weight without executio=
n.=C2=A0 I think counting the number of occurrences of OP_CODESEPARATOR (pe=
rhaps at the same time we count OP_CHECKSIG operations?) is a reasonable co=
mpromise, and increasing the weight according to my proposed formula based =
on that count (ideally we&#39;d take OP_IF branches into account).<br></div=
><div>=C2=A0<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px=
 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
I would also like to believe that whoever went through the trouble of using=
 OP_CODESEPARATOR reads this list.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I wi=
sh this were the case too, but I don&#39;t think it is reasonable to assume=
 that (even <a href=3D"https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15482#issuec=
omment-469836918" target=3D"_blank">maaku isn&#39;t subscribed</a>), and I =
don&#39;t even think it is fair to assume such a someone necessarily even s=
peaks English.<br></div></div></div>

--000000000000efd01c0583ad845f--