path: root/21/2e16413e541838a83a644b143d67d4cbca13b0

Return-Path: <tamas@bitsofproof.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33BE874
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun, 23 Aug 2015 06:42:26 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from wp059.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp059.webpack.hosteurope.de
	[80.237.132.66])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D8D0E5
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun, 23 Aug 2015 06:42:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [37.143.74.116] (helo=[192.168.2.11]); authenticated
	by wp059.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa
	(TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	id 1ZTOyw-0002b4-SK; Sun, 23 Aug 2015 08:42:18 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_17BEBBF6-E660-4298-A3A0-1309321DE788";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail 2.5.1
From: Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABr1YTcx4V0Q4-ZQBEiNG-z1NKeFzxzhMekRN3YRRLz+bme2iw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 08:42:17 +0200
Message-Id: <22CF03CB-7A4B-44D9-8989-22798795BB16@bitsofproof.com>
References: <CABm2gDrApVuxF8DFf32V=pQhDKvvVfcDK=LeCXJ9h9o8CY+wNQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<55B723EA.7010700@voskuil.org>
	<CABm2gDok2gH2R8=x3a8PmPiM56WFg3TKzCum_WS=uV9-T1Ss3g@mail.gmail.com>
	<55B939CF.1080903@voskuil.org>
	<CABm2gDq1wHP01Tncw3hu=SCWQHaAOMjWOVYQWdQsOZ+E7zp9Yw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABm2gDr_ePfPeWB8pEO8QNHDjUZpybVuCAdDmMxJxMaC8+2bGA@mail.gmail.com>
	<C4EA4A39-1920-4F33-822C-FBD12DF81004@bitsofproof.com>
	<CABm2gDqkF20ZoexQSV8iORb3ukxxZr5RasTLxJqQfSTsTqHvog@mail.gmail.com>
	<3390F712-879A-46E9-ABCD-D35B51190304@bitsofproof.com>
	<CABm2gDpcEmiPNQWeUk5aTjuTSRAJSPYfgAKc7B_qrqw0w04xoA@mail.gmail.com>
	<C486E9D9-D799-48B9-B80F-1A165DFD6536@bitsofproof.com>
	<CABr1YTcx4V0Q4-ZQBEiNG-z1NKeFzxzhMekRN3YRRLz+bme2iw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de; tamas@bitsofproof.com; 1440312144;
	7eb00295; 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,URIBL_BLACK autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Libbitcoin <libbitcoin@lists.dyne.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Libconsensus separated repository (was Bitcoin
	Core and hard forks)
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 06:42:26 -0000


--Apple-Mail=_17BEBBF6-E660-4298-A3A0-1309321DE788
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_B72C70AC-BB6F-472F-83AF-BB1FEAC4B96B"


--Apple-Mail=_B72C70AC-BB6F-472F-83AF-BB1FEAC4B96B
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

I see the huge amount of sweat and love that went into core and it =
actually hurts to see that most is expended in friction and lack of a =
vision for the software architecture.

To be concrete, this was my plan if dealing with the Core code base:

1) I'd consider the separation of networking and storage as suggested =
for a future extended libconsensus low priority, as their design should =
be (are) dominated by the need of the consensus logic only.

2) create an API to the consensus+networking+storage service that is not =
at the C++ language level but some scaleable cross-platform remoting, =
like eg. ZeroMQ.
This API should be minimal and simple, assuming that one fully trusts =
the node answering it. This API would unlock user land development by =
distinct teams with diverse technologies.

3) move the wallet, QT and RPC and other backward compatibility stuff =
(if e.g. there is some mining support) in-top of the new API and into =
distinct source code repositories.


Tamas Blummer

> On Aug 23, 2015, at 03:23, Eric Lombrozo <elombrozo@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> I've been pushing for greater modularization since I first got into =
bitcoin. I got quickly frustrated when I was only able to get through =
very few things (i.e. moving core structure serialization classes to a =
separate unit not called main). Working on Bitcoin has an added layer of =
frustration that goes beyond most open source projects: even though =
we're clearly in userland working at the application layer, a good =
layered protocol design is still lacking. We have no standards process =
separate from what basically amount to updates to one specific reference =
implementation. And we all need to agree on any major change, since a =
blockchain that is easily forked in contentious ways pretty much defeats =
its own purpose.
>=20
> I went off to develop my own stack, where I could more easily avoid =
politics and focus on engineering. But I now understand the politics are =
inevitable. Bitcoin is inherently a cooperative project. Several people =
have poured themselves passionately into the reference codebase, most of =
whom did it (at least initially) purely as unpaid volunteers. There's a =
lot of love that's gone into this. But it's become pretty clear that the =
modularization is no longer merely a matter of good engineering - it is =
essential to resolving serious political challenges.
>=20
> Perhaps the most frustrating thing of all is watching people pushing =
for relatively superficial yet highly controversial changes while we =
still lack the proper infrastructure to handle these kinds of =
divergences of opinion without either stagnating or becoming polarized.
>=20
> I could continue working to reimplement an entire stack from scratch, =
as several others have also done - but besides the serious effort =
duplication this entails, it doesn't really seem like it will ultimately =
be a convergent process. It's too easy to let ego and habit dictate =
one's preferences rather than rational engineering considerations.
>=20
> I know that some might feel I'm just preaching to the choir, but we =
should probably take a step back from implementation hackery and try to =
specify some core protocol layers, focusing on interfaces. Specifically, =
we need a consensus layer that doesn't try to specify networking, =
storage, wallets, UI, etc. Let different people improve upon these =
things independently in their own implementations. What matters is that =
we all converge on a common history and state. At the same time, let's =
open up more competition on all these other things that are separate =
from the consensus layer.
>=20
> If only we were to dedicate a fraction of the effort we've put into =
this whole block size circus into what's actually important...and I =
blame myself as well...
>=20
>=20
> On Sat, Aug 22, 2015, 4:05 AM Tamas Blummer via bitcoin-dev =
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org =
<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
>> On Aug 21, 2015, at 21:46, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <jtimon@jtimon.cc =
<mailto:jtimon@jtimon.cc>> wrote:
>>=20
>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Tamas Blummer =
<tamas@bitsofproof.com <mailto:tamas@bitsofproof.com>> wrote:
>>> Every re-implementation, re-factoring even copy-paste introduces a =
risk of disagreement,
>>> but also open the chance of doing the work better, in the sense of =
software engineering.
>>=20
>> But you don't want something better, you want something functionally =
identical.
>> You may want to watch sipa's explanation on why "the implementation =
is
>> the specification" and the reasons to separate libconsensus:
>> https://youtu.be/l3O4nh79CUU?t=3D764 =
<https://youtu.be/l3O4nh79CUU?t=3D764>
>=20
> I do want something better, but not for the focus you have.
>=20
> Not because what you produce was not high quality, but because quality =
is achieved at a very
> high cost and is hard to uphold over generations of developer. You =
focus on a single use case
> while there are many out there for distributed ledgers.
>=20
> I think in an infrastructure for enterprise applications, building =
consensus on the ledger is a
> cornerstone there, but is only a piece of the solution. I built =
several commercially successful
> deployments where I delegated the consensus building to a border =
router, a Bitcoin Core,
> then interfaced that trusted peer with my  implementation that =
accepted Core=E2=80=99s decisions
> in an SPV manner. One might think of this setup as wasteful and =
unsuitable for =E2=80=9Csmall devices=E2=80=9D
> therefore an example of centralization people here try to avoid.
>=20
> Enterprises have sufficient resources. Solving the business problem is =
valuable to them even at
> magnitudes higher cost than a hobbyist would bear.
>=20
> For mainstream adoption you need to get enterprises on board too, and  =
that is what I care of.
> Enterprises want code that is not only high quality, but is easy to =
maintain with a development
> team with high attrition. One has to take whatever help is offered for =
that, and one is modern
> languages and runtimes.
>=20
> Bits of Proof=E2=80=99s own implementation of the scripts was not =
practically relevant in my commercially
> successful deployments, because of the use of a border router, but it =
helped development,
> enabling easier debug and precise error feedback esp. end even after =
Core had a reject message.
>=20
> I integrated libconsensus only for the hope that is significantly =
fastens application side tx verification,
>  which it has turned out it does not, until secp265k1 is integrated.
>=20
> I would likely use an other extended libconsensus too, but do not =
think there was a dependency on
> that for enterprise development.
>=20
> It would help there more to have a slim protocol server, no wallet, no =
rpc, no qt but a high
> performance remoting API.
>=20
>> Since you already depend on libconsensus for VerifyScript, wouldn't =
it
>> be nice that it also offered VerifyTx, VerifyHeader and VerifyBlock?
>> You would still have complete control over storage, concurrency,
>> networking, policy...
>> My plan is for the C API to interface with the external storage by
>> passing a function pointer to it.
>=20
>=20
> Storage and validation is non-trivially interconnected, but I now the =
separation can be done,
> since I did it.
>=20
> Excuse me, but function pointers is a pattern I used in the 80=E2=80=99s=
. I know that they are behind
> the curtain of modern abstractions with similar use, I still prefer =
not to see them again.
>=20
> Tamas Blummer
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org =
<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev =
<https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>


--Apple-Mail=_B72C70AC-BB6F-472F-83AF-BB1FEAC4B96B
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=utf-8

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" =
class=3D"">I see the huge amount of sweat and love that went into core =
and it actually hurts to see that most is expended in friction and lack =
of a vision for the software architecture.<div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">To be concrete, this was my plan if =
dealing with the Core code base:</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">1) I'd consider the separation of =
networking and storage as suggested for a future extended libconsensus =
low priority, as their design should be (are) dominated by the need of =
the consensus logic only.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D"">2) create an API to the consensus+networking+storage service =
that is not at the C++ language level but some scaleable cross-platform =
remoting, like eg. ZeroMQ.&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">This API should be =
minimal and simple, assuming that one fully trusts the node answering =
it. This API would unlock user land development by distinct teams with =
diverse technologies.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D"">3) move the wallet, QT and RPC and other backward =
compatibility stuff (if e.g. there is some mining support) in-top of the =
new API and into distinct source code repositories.&nbsp;</div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D""><div =
apple-content-edited=3D"true" class=3D"">
<div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: =
12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; =
letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: =
start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; =
widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); =
font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; =
text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" class=3D"">Tamas Blummer</div><div =
style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; =
font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; =
letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: =
start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; =
widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div></div><div><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D""><div class=3D"">On Aug 23, 2015, at 03:23, Eric Lombrozo =
&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:elombrozo@gmail.com" =
class=3D"">elombrozo@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=3D""><p dir=3D"ltr" =
class=3D"">I've been pushing for greater modularization since I first =
got into bitcoin. I got quickly frustrated when I was only able to get =
through very few things (i.e. moving core structure serialization =
classes to a separate unit not called main). Working on Bitcoin has an =
added layer of frustration that goes beyond most open source projects: =
even though we're clearly in userland working at the application layer, =
a good layered protocol design is still lacking. We have no standards =
process separate from what basically amount to updates to one specific =
reference implementation. And we all need to agree on any major change, =
since a blockchain that is easily forked in contentious ways pretty much =
defeats its own purpose.</p><p dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"">I went off to =
develop my own stack, where I could more easily avoid politics and focus =
on engineering. But I now understand the politics are inevitable. =
Bitcoin is inherently a cooperative project. Several people have poured =
themselves passionately into the reference codebase, most of whom did it =
(at least initially) purely as unpaid volunteers. There's a lot of love =
that's gone into this. But it's become pretty clear that the =
modularization is no longer merely a matter of good engineering - it is =
essential to resolving serious political challenges.</p><p dir=3D"ltr" =
class=3D"">Perhaps the most frustrating thing of all is watching people =
pushing for relatively superficial yet highly controversial changes =
while we still lack the proper infrastructure to handle these kinds of =
divergences of opinion without either stagnating or becoming =
polarized.</p><p dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"">I could continue working to =
reimplement an entire stack from scratch, as several others have also =
done - but besides the serious effort duplication this entails, it =
doesn't really seem like it will ultimately be a convergent process. =
It's too easy to let ego and habit dictate one's preferences rather than =
rational engineering considerations. </p><p dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"">I =
know that some might feel I'm just preaching to the choir, but we should =
probably take a step back from implementation hackery and try to specify =
some core protocol layers, focusing on interfaces. Specifically, we need =
a consensus layer that doesn't try to specify networking, storage, =
wallets, UI, etc. Let different people improve upon these things =
independently in their own implementations. What matters is that we all =
converge on a common history and state. At the same time, let's open up =
more competition on all these other things that are separate from the =
consensus layer.</p><p dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"">If only we were to =
dedicate a fraction of the effort we've put into this whole block size =
circus into what's actually important...and I blame myself as well...<br =
class=3D""></p>
<br class=3D""><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"">On =
Sat, Aug 22, 2015, 4:05 AM&nbsp;Tamas Blummer via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" =
class=3D"">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt; wrote:<br =
class=3D""></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div =
style=3D"word-wrap:break-word" class=3D""><div class=3D""><blockquote =
type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div class=3D"">On Aug 21, 2015, at 21:46, =
Jorge Tim=C3=B3n &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:jtimon@jtimon.cc" target=3D"_blank"=
 class=3D"">jtimon@jtimon.cc</a>&gt; wrote:</div><br class=3D""><div =
class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">On Thu, Aug =
20, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Tamas Blummer &lt;</span><a =
href=3D"mailto:tamas@bitsofproof.com" =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" target=3D"_blank" class=3D"">tamas@bitsofproof.com</a><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">&gt; =
wrote:</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D"">Every re-implementation, re-factoring even =
copy-paste introduces a risk of disagreement,<br class=3D"">but also =
open the chance of doing the work better, in the sense of software =
engineering.<br class=3D""></blockquote><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">But you don't =
want something better, you want something functionally =
identical.</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">You may want =
to watch sipa's explanation on why "the implementation is</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">the =
specification" and the reasons to separate libconsensus:</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><a href=3D"https://youtu.be/l3O4nh79CUU?t=3D764" =
target=3D"_blank" class=3D"">https://youtu.be/l3O4nh79CUU?t=3D764</a><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""></div></blockquote><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div></div></div><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word" =
class=3D""><div class=3D""><div class=3D"">I do want something better, =
but not for the focus you have.&nbsp;</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Not because what you produce was not =
high quality, but because quality is achieved at a very</div><div =
class=3D"">high cost and is hard to uphold over generations of =
developer. You focus on a single use case</div><div class=3D"">while =
there are many out there for distributed ledgers.</div><div class=3D""><br=
 class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">I think in an infrastructure for =
enterprise applications, building consensus on the ledger is =
a&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">cornerstone there, but is only a piece of =
the solution. I built several commercially successful</div><div =
class=3D"">deployments where I delegated the consensus building to a =
border router, a Bitcoin Core,&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">then =
interfaced that trusted peer with my &nbsp;implementation that accepted =
Core=E2=80=99s decisions&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">in an SPV manner. =
One might think of this setup as wasteful and unsuitable for =E2=80=9Csmal=
l devices=E2=80=9D</div><div class=3D"">therefore an example of =
centralization people here try to avoid.</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Enterprises have sufficient resources. =
Solving the business problem is valuable to them even at&nbsp;</div><div =
class=3D"">magnitudes higher cost than a hobbyist would bear.</div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">For mainstream adoption =
you need to get enterprises on board too, and &nbsp;that is what I care =
of.&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">Enterprises want code that is not only =
high quality, but is easy to maintain with a development&nbsp;</div><div =
class=3D"">team with high attrition. One has to take whatever help is =
offered for that, and one is modern&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">languages =
and runtimes.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D""><div class=3D"">Bits of Proof=E2=80=99s own implementation of =
the scripts was not practically relevant in my commercially</div><div =
class=3D"">successful deployments, because of the use of a border =
router, but it helped development,&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">enabling =
easier debug and precise error feedback esp. end even after Core had a =
reject message.&nbsp;</div></div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div=
 class=3D"">I integrated libconsensus only for the hope that is =
significantly fastens application side tx verification,</div><div =
class=3D"">&nbsp;which it has turned out it does not, until secp265k1 is =
integrated.</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">I =
would likely use an other extended libconsensus too, but do not think =
there was a dependency on&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">that for enterprise =
development.&nbsp;</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D"">It would help there more to have a slim protocol server, no =
wallet, no rpc, no qt but a high&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">performance =
remoting API.</div></div></div><div style=3D"word-wrap:break-word" =
class=3D""><div class=3D""><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><blockquote type=3D"cite" class=3D""><div =
class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">Since you =
already depend on libconsensus for VerifyScript, wouldn't it</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">be nice that =
it also offered VerifyTx, VerifyHeader and VerifyBlock?</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">You would =
still have complete control over storage, concurrency,</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">networking, =
policy...</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">My plan is =
for the C API to interface with the external storage by</span><br =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px" class=3D""><span =
style=3D"font-family:Helvetica;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-varia=
nt:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text=
-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-s=
pacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important" class=3D"">passing a =
function pointer to it.</span></div></blockquote></div></div><div =
style=3D"word-wrap:break-word" class=3D""><div class=3D""></div><div =
class=3D""><br class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Storage and validation =
is non-trivially interconnected, but I now the separation can be =
done,</div><div class=3D"">since I did it.&nbsp;</div><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D"">Excuse me, but function pointers is a =
pattern I used in the 80=E2=80=99s. I know that they are =
behind&nbsp;</div><div class=3D"">the curtain of modern abstractions =
with similar use, I still prefer not to see them again.</div></div><div =
style=3D"word-wrap:break-word" class=3D""><div class=3D""><br =
class=3D""></div><div class=3D""><div class=3D""><div class=3D"">Tamas =
Blummer</div><div class=3D""><br class=3D""></div></div><div =
class=3D""><blockquote type=3D"cite" =
class=3D""></blockquote></div></div></div>________________________________=
_______________<br class=3D"">
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br class=3D"">
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank"=
 class=3D"">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br class=3D"">
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev"=
 rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank" =
class=3D"">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev<=
/a><br class=3D"">
</blockquote></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=3D""></div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_B72C70AC-BB6F-472F-83AF-BB1FEAC4B96B--

--Apple-Mail=_17BEBBF6-E660-4298-A3A0-1309321DE788
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJV2WtKAAoJEPZykcUXcTkc5WcIAJCySmxF3G2DiiZ4OegkX0Fs
ONIkmP9+l/+jPcAeZ1CdbZvXajAnMpAIlNdM+B/qK44vU8T4PCIFZNGgNOX0F1Fx
d2opKN+K+ILfGVhsbE4Tb55C9ExqYdlIinEXAaYVrZRda4zZfHqeO+oQ378zFYwX
c2PXOHVqbK76Qzmua5BmN63mq+dpm+DALpSi+aTOP2f5Y4xCViQPZjO0E6UL1WPd
qR+s9AIWYDLBcGAYPymC7zIWjFbwuNnRgdxhKLoZnfHOdWI4YnKosEj4ey/N0mJg
24oYb48zG3p4jemY0qh7CewZpFz1qS0PDJry1hr2cEEOIemdgK4YC8coi4T0D1w=
=3sUq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_17BEBBF6-E660-4298-A3A0-1309321DE788--