Luke Dashjr [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2017-09-30 📝 Original message:On Thursday 07 September ...
Published at
2023-06-07 18:05:38Event JSON
{
"id": "0722418e71458bbbac141f3924ec5aec2bd5656146d8d20493d9235149bd6b1a",
"pubkey": "5a6d1f44482b67b5b0d30cc1e829b66a251f0dc99448377dbe3c5e0faf6c3803",
"created_at": 1686161138,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"0d97933d6393537f8afa1f55574e0ec2278e08b49a828e8a6bf1f6fff59c2613",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"67d56edbc325a6594fd6e749cd3fe0f1e84b84656836a25ee778037273f6cd8a",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1c61d995949cbfaf14f767784e166bde865c7b8783d7aa3bf0a1d014b70c0069"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-09-30\n📝 Original message:On Thursday 07 September 2017 12:38:55 AM Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev \nwrote:\n\u003e Tail-call execution semantics\n\u003e BIP: https://gist.github.com/maaku/f7b2e710c53f601279549aa74eeb5368\n\u003e Code: https://github.com/maaku/bitcoin/tree/tail-call-semantics\n\nJust noticed this doesn't count sigops toward the block sigop limit.\nIs that really safe? How long would it take, to verify a malicious block with \nonly inputs such that there is nearly 4 MB of sigops?\n\n(I do already understand the difficulty in supporting the sigop limit.)\n\nLuke",
"sig": "bab539a30790da2b44fa65df8fdd073340b9f58a10158031290bbaf535e5ea03d769b630459cff8d3a52e140c9d9dd452e79a5dcbd4cf86b256f8eba6159874f"
}