📅 Original date posted:2014-05-03
📝 Original message:Is it more complex? The current implementation using template matching
seems more complex than `if script.vch[0] == OP_RETURN &&
script.vch.size() < 42`
On 05/03/2014 12:08 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Mark Friedenbach <mark at monetize.io> wrote:
>> I don't think such a pull request would be accepted. The point was to
>> minimize impact to the block chain. Each extras txout adds 9 bytes
>> minimum, with zero benefit over serializing the data together in a
>> single OP_RETURN.
>
> In this case it's not a question extra txouts, its a question of
> additional pushes. Assuming you didn't get the push overhead for free,
> the only issue I see with that off the cuff is extra complexity in the
> IsStandard rule... but really, why? Your application already needs to
> define the meaning of the data— what point is there in making your
> hash commitment less uniform with the rest of the network?
>
Mark Friedenbach [ARCHIVE] /
npub1r3…48d0u
2023-06-07 15:20:54
in reply to nevent1q…24a5
Author Public Key
npub1r3san9v5njl6798hvauyu9ntm6r9c7u8s0t65wls58gpfdcvqp5sa48d0uPublished at
2023-06-07 15:20:54Event JSON
{
"id": "a269cb53f07ed309e9954073729229d9d4789abd77c34cf88de49b320c250abf",
"pubkey": "1c61d995949cbfaf14f767784e166bde865c7b8783d7aa3bf0a1d014b70c0069",
"created_at": 1686151254,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"16e41fd8d1a66d26890ffeb755f22e3a8eb1c8b9debfb4782bf4946f5773a9bc",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"402585ba3634bbd87396f02be98151f96d0e77b7958328428b7c347474e61335",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-05-03\n📝 Original message:Is it more complex? The current implementation using template matching\nseems more complex than `if script.vch[0] == OP_RETURN \u0026\u0026\nscript.vch.size() \u003c 42`\n\nOn 05/03/2014 12:08 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:\n\u003e On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Mark Friedenbach \u003cmark at monetize.io\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e I don't think such a pull request would be accepted. The point was to\n\u003e\u003e minimize impact to the block chain. Each extras txout adds 9 bytes\n\u003e\u003e minimum, with zero benefit over serializing the data together in a\n\u003e\u003e single OP_RETURN.\n\u003e \n\u003e In this case it's not a question extra txouts, its a question of\n\u003e additional pushes. Assuming you didn't get the push overhead for free,\n\u003e the only issue I see with that off the cuff is extra complexity in the\n\u003e IsStandard rule... but really, why? Your application already needs to\n\u003e define the meaning of the data— what point is there in making your\n\u003e hash commitment less uniform with the rest of the network?\n\u003e",
"sig": "b80330a852eb67303b7fc92269ac82fb54d8d53ce2119fe1fb1014a14b372c15e265499101c6203df10eb73d0041c35b900f24f4252e3a950c146135d6710eab"
}