12017-06-23T00:01:50  *** RoyceX has quit IRC
  22017-06-23T00:29:42  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
  32017-06-23T00:46:32  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  42017-06-23T00:52:48  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  52017-06-23T00:58:47  *** abpa has quit IRC
  62017-06-23T01:09:56  <morcos> achow101: i'm not sure estimatesmartfee is really designed for that kind of stable lower bound..  I agree it shoudl be possible to hack something together though
  72017-06-23T01:10:13  <morcos> I'm not sure what you mean about it returning a rate of 0
  82017-06-23T01:10:23  <achow101> it returns CFeeRate(0) on failure
  92017-06-23T01:10:25  <morcos> That shouldn't happen beyond the very first few blocks after you turn on a new node
 102017-06-23T01:10:31  <morcos> Why are you getting a failure
 112017-06-23T01:10:42  <achow101> confirmation target is 1008
 122017-06-23T01:10:50  <achow101> (It seems like it fails)
 132017-06-23T01:10:58  <morcos> Because it returns 0?
 142017-06-23T01:11:13  <achow101> yes? maybe I'm wrong.
 152017-06-23T01:11:24  <morcos> What do you mean yes?  Is it returning 0
 162017-06-23T01:11:33  <morcos> It should return an estimate for the highest target it can
 172017-06-23T01:11:41  <morcos> If for some reason you are getting 0, that is a problem
 182017-06-23T01:11:56  <achow101> I'm still writing the code so I don't know
 192017-06-23T01:12:05  <morcos> oh
 202017-06-23T01:12:19  <morcos> you know there is an rpc call so you can see what estimatesmartfee will give you on a node
 212017-06-23T01:13:06  <achow101> right. It gave me -1
 222017-06-23T01:13:17  <morcos> ok, that is surprising
 232017-06-23T01:13:20  <achow101> ehh, that's actually for a target of 2016, not 1008
 242017-06-23T01:13:21  <morcos> how long has it been up?
 252017-06-23T01:13:36  <morcos> ok, yeah 2016 is not supported
 262017-06-23T01:13:44  <gmaxwell> $ ./bitcoin-cli estimatefee 1008
 272017-06-23T01:13:45  <morcos> anything >1008 will always return -1
 282017-06-23T01:13:45  <gmaxwell> -1
 292017-06-23T01:13:51  <morcos> ARGHHH
 302017-06-23T01:13:57  <morcos> i'm going to strangle all of you people
 312017-06-23T01:14:09  <sipa> gmaxwell: estimateSMARTfee :)
 322017-06-23T01:14:10  <morcos> estimatefee is deprecated
 332017-06-23T01:14:26  <achow101> 18:13:36
 342017-06-23T01:14:26  <achow101> 
 352017-06-23T01:14:26  <achow101> estimatesmartfee 1009
 362017-06-23T01:14:26  <achow101> 18:13:36
 372017-06-23T01:14:27  <achow101> 
 382017-06-23T01:14:27  <achow101> {
 392017-06-23T01:14:29  <achow101>   "feerate": -1,
 402017-06-23T01:14:30  <achow101>   "blocks": 1009
 412017-06-23T01:14:32  <achow101> }
 422017-06-23T01:14:47  <achow101> -1 for anything greater than 1008. is that supposed to happen?
 432017-06-23T01:14:51  <morcos> yes
 442017-06-23T01:14:56  <morcos> that is supposed to happen
 452017-06-23T01:15:04  <gmaxwell> estimatesmartfee gave me -1 too but I was calling it with 2016 because some reason I thought that was the maximum.
 462017-06-23T01:15:18  <achow101> why doesn't it just use the highest available like it does for 1008?
 472017-06-23T01:15:33  <morcos> achow101: because it is telling you that you are using it wrong
 482017-06-23T01:15:43  <achow101> oh
 492017-06-23T01:15:49  <morcos> it will never be able to give you an answer for 1009 or 2016
 502017-06-23T01:16:10  <morcos> but for 1008 you are using it correctly, so it gives you the best answer it can and tells you what target that answer was for
 512017-06-23T01:16:46  <morcos> the design is so that if you do estimatesmartfee N  for 1 <= N <= 1008 it should very very rarely give you a -1.
 522017-06-23T01:17:11  <morcos> This will happen only if you have a brand new node you just started up, or if your node has been down for > 6 weeks
 532017-06-23T01:17:24  <achow101> ok
 542017-06-23T01:17:28  <morcos> And then it'll only last for a couple of blocks after your node is fully synced
 552017-06-23T01:17:45  <morcos> For your purposes I would recommend that you ask estimatesmartfee 1008
 562017-06-23T01:18:02  <gmaxwell> achow101: so your issue is just that you weren't using estimator.estimateSmartFee ?
 572017-06-23T01:18:26  <achow101> I went off your word and used 2016 originally :p
 582017-06-23T01:18:27  <morcos> Look at the blocks it returns, and if it returns blocks < 144 for example, then perhaps you want to take the min with the fallback fee or something
 592017-06-23T01:18:33  <gmaxwell> morcos: for clarity, he's changing CreateTransaction code in wallet.cpp not using the RPC. :)
 602017-06-23T01:18:46  <gmaxwell> achow101: oh see, don't listen to me.
 612017-06-23T01:18:57  <morcos> yeah makes sense, but the answer should be the same as the RPC gives you
 622017-06-23T01:19:23  <achow101> ok
 632017-06-23T01:19:37  <morcos> i'd also see if you get use the GetMinimumFee function (if thats what its called) which will do smart things like max with the mempool min fee
 642017-06-23T01:19:55  <gmaxwell> morcos: looks like he was doing the right thing but I'd quipped call it with 2016 blocks or something. Which he did, which then resulted in "wtf is it using CFeeRate(0) as its return value for error cases" then also saw that estimatefee -1ing on 1008 and sooo.
 652017-06-23T01:20:27  <morcos> one thing that might be missing is documentation of the 1008 upper bound
 662017-06-23T01:20:33  <morcos> is that in the rpc help?
 672017-06-23T01:20:51  <achow101> morcos: nope
 682017-06-23T01:20:58  <morcos> yeah that should get added
 692017-06-23T01:21:34  <gmaxwell> why doesn't estimatesmartfee 2016  just reutrn the 1008 result (it gives blocks in the result, so if its telling you a lower number, you know)
 702017-06-23T01:21:37  <achow101> I was looking at the code for estimatesmartfee too, but not a lot of comments there either :(
 712017-06-23T01:21:57  <gmaxwell> fortunately dumb code that just uses the answer w/ a negative feerate will only manage to produce an invalid txn. :)
 722017-06-23T01:22:08  <morcos> gmaxwell: well i mean the real answer is this all just built on prior version which always returned -1 if you put something outside the allowable range
 732017-06-23T01:22:38  <gmaxwell> doesn't sound very smart.
 742017-06-23T01:22:40  <gmaxwell> :P
 752017-06-23T01:22:55  <gmaxwell> morcos: than you for the cluestick.
 762017-06-23T01:23:05  <morcos> but i do think it is somewhat reasonable for it to indicate to you that you used an argument outside the supported range
 772017-06-23T01:23:50  <morcos> also see this: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/10625
 782017-06-23T01:24:14  <morcos> I want to implement this for fee esitmation.  But sounds like it would also be good for what you are doing
 792017-06-23T01:24:37  <morcos> I guess you'll get it automatically if its just inside of estimatesmartfee
 802017-06-23T01:26:08  <morcos> oops slight typo fixed in that issue
 812017-06-23T01:26:37  <gmaxwell> well two issues: I think that you should get a best effort answer if you give too big a value-- indicating with blocks would be fine,  but also if we can't give an answer we should omit the field, not use -1.
 822017-06-23T01:27:32  <gmaxwell> (mentioning it for the future, not blaming anyone (esp not here)-- often magic values for errors results in failures)
 832017-06-23T01:28:18  <morcos> Yes I agree
 842017-06-23T01:28:27  <morcos> But does that mean we should change it?
 852017-06-23T01:28:47  <gmaxwell> I dunno. We could create an estimatesmarterfee with the new interface.
 862017-06-23T01:28:48  <morcos> I suppose I should have changed it when I made estimatesmartfee since that was a new AO
 872017-06-23T01:28:49  * gmaxwell ducks
 882017-06-23T01:28:56  <morcos> API all together
 892017-06-23T01:29:08  <gmaxwell> yea, sorry I didn't catch that then.
 902017-06-23T01:29:34  <sipa> gmaxwell: saneestimatesmartfee
 912017-06-23T01:29:35  <sipa> :p
 922017-06-23T01:30:11  <gmaxwell> footgunlessfees (perhaps an overstatement)
 932017-06-23T01:36:17  <gmaxwell> It doesn't help that C/C++/and friends don't have option types like rust and haskell, so overloaded error-return types are in people's blood.
 942017-06-23T01:37:10  <gmaxwell> Pieter pointed out earlier that C++17 has one, but without looking I'm kind of dubious about its utility because the rest of the language (and libraries) weren't built around it being there.
 952017-06-23T01:38:14  <sipa> well, C++17 does not technically exist, but it is with near certain probability expected that it will have it :)
 962017-06-23T01:46:11  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
 972017-06-23T01:48:02  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 982017-06-23T01:48:53  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 992017-06-23T02:16:44  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002017-06-23T02:21:47  *** ProfMac_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1012017-06-23T02:23:32  <instagibbs> gmaxwell, so thinking ahead, if we replace IsDust change checks with something more reasonable, is there any reason to try again rather than simply prune/keep the change and exit?
1022017-06-23T02:26:34  <instagibbs> I feel like I'm writing extra logic here just to protect our ridiculous IsDust logic :)
1032017-06-23T02:26:50  <gmaxwell> Are you asking if there is any reason to loo kat all?
1042017-06-23T02:27:37  <gmaxwell> gah, loop at all.
1052017-06-23T02:27:38  <sipa> what is looing?
1062017-06-23T02:27:50  <sipa> ah
1072017-06-23T02:31:15  <instagibbs> correct
1082017-06-23T02:33:05  <instagibbs> specifically looping for change, not for fee(different issue we can tackle later)
1092017-06-23T02:34:07  <gmaxwell> obviously for fee that is unaviodable without effective rates.
1102017-06-23T02:34:16  <gmaxwell> Gonna have to explain what behavior you think we're protecting on the change part.
1112017-06-23T02:34:19  * gmaxwell brings up the code now
1122017-06-23T02:35:23  <instagibbs> Ok so right now it's 1) < IsDust, dump 2) < MIN_FINAL_CHANGE : loop 3) < MIN_F_C keep
1132017-06-23T02:35:42  * instagibbs heading off for now
1142017-06-23T02:36:20  <gmaxwell> right if we get a viabile solution and the change is under dust, turn the dust to fee and call it done.
1152017-06-23T02:37:01  <gmaxwell> otherwise, if its under min_final_change loop with a bigger target to try to get enough coins to meet that criteria.
1162017-06-23T02:37:08  <gmaxwell> otherwise we're done.
1172017-06-23T02:37:23  <gmaxwell> and you're asking if that dust were smarter could we skip test 2?
1182017-06-23T02:37:55  <instagibbs> yes
1192017-06-23T02:38:22  <gmaxwell> I _think_ that even if dust is smart, there is s range of sizes where we would rather take the change than discard to fees, but would prefer our outputs be larger than that.
1202017-06-23T02:39:07  <morcos> I think thats the tricky part of the logic
1212017-06-23T02:39:35  <gmaxwell> Basically at the sane dust level the output is worth nothing. So obviously better to not create it.    But above that it's worth something, but we'd still rather not have a bunch of almost nothing outputs in our wallet.
1222017-06-23T02:39:56  <morcos> It depends on both the set of outputs you have (available and are currently using) and the fee rate you are using on this tx as opposed to what you might use on future txs
1232017-06-23T02:40:33  <gmaxwell> certantly if you think fees now are lower than average you should be especially eager to aggregate.
1242017-06-23T02:40:45  <morcos> I had written up a heuristic previously that did different things depending on what your tx confirm target is
1252017-06-23T02:41:12  <morcos> yeah so how "smart" you want to get about this in an automated fashion is tricky
1262017-06-23T02:41:34  *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1272017-06-23T02:44:12  <instagibbs> hm yes the "utxo management" aspect, ok ill keep it around for Future Work
1282017-06-23T02:53:35  *** Guest97515 has quit IRC
1292017-06-23T02:53:44  *** Victor_sueca has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1302017-06-23T02:53:56  *** Guest97515 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1312017-06-23T02:56:36  *** Victorsueca has quit IRC
1322017-06-23T02:58:29  <instagibbs> So in essence we have aspirational utxo amounts/types that the wallet can strive for, and values that are considered worthless
1332017-06-23T02:59:20  <instagibbs> former we have no real mechanism in place so min change is what we're using
1342017-06-23T03:01:29  *** wolfspra1l has quit IRC
1352017-06-23T03:01:40  *** wolfspraul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1362017-06-23T03:04:23  <phantomcircuit> i still think that have a score for a set of utxo's and then just randomly selecting utxo's to try is a reasonable approach
1372017-06-23T03:05:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] RHavar opened pull request #10655: Properly document target_confirmations in listsinceblock (master...listsinceblock) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10655
1382017-06-23T03:15:02  *** wolfspraul has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1392017-06-23T03:29:24  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1402017-06-23T03:33:52  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1412017-06-23T03:46:59  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1422017-06-23T04:13:33  *** ula has quit IRC
1432017-06-23T04:19:55  *** dermoth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442017-06-23T04:48:33  *** jamesob has quit IRC
1452017-06-23T04:49:10  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1462017-06-23T04:53:29  *** jamesob has quit IRC
1472017-06-23T05:31:51  *** chjj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1482017-06-23T05:37:11  *** Lauda has quit IRC
1492017-06-23T05:38:10  *** Lauda has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1502017-06-23T05:56:10  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
1512017-06-23T05:57:51  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1522017-06-23T06:12:44  *** bordeaux_facile has quit IRC
1532017-06-23T06:28:14  *** Giszmo has quit IRC
1542017-06-23T06:28:56  *** bordeaux_facile has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1552017-06-23T06:32:52  *** bordeaux_facile has quit IRC
1562017-06-23T06:33:17  *** bordeaux_facile has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1572017-06-23T06:37:28  *** bordeaux_facile has quit IRC
1582017-06-23T06:43:22  *** jannes has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1592017-06-23T06:43:40  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] str4d opened pull request #10657: Utils: Improvements to ECDSA key-handling code (master...libsecp256k1-patches) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10657
1602017-06-23T06:47:27  *** bordeaux_facile has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1612017-06-23T06:57:15  *** bordeaux_facile has quit IRC
1622017-06-23T07:00:19  *** bordeaux_facile has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632017-06-23T07:04:10  *** kexkey has quit IRC
1642017-06-23T07:09:25  *** Yogaqueef has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1652017-06-23T07:15:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ReneNyffenegger opened pull request #10658: German translation of '%n year(s)' (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10658
1662017-06-23T07:16:55  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10658: German translation of '%n year(s)' (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10658
1672017-06-23T07:18:49  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #10659: [qa] blockchain: Pass on closed connection during generate call (master...Mf1706-qaStopPass) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10659
1682017-06-23T07:36:49  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1692017-06-23T07:37:20  *** pavel_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702017-06-23T07:37:30  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
1712017-06-23T07:51:22  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #10660: Allow to cancel the txdb upgrade via splashscreen keypress 's' (master...2017/06/chainstate_update_prog) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10660
1722017-06-23T07:58:30  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732017-06-23T07:58:47  *** Victor_sueca is now known as Victorsueca
1742017-06-23T07:59:18  *** jouke has quit IRC
1752017-06-23T08:01:25  *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1762017-06-23T08:01:25  *** jouke has quit IRC
1772017-06-23T08:01:25  *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1782017-06-23T08:14:45  *** btcdrak has quit IRC
1792017-06-23T08:24:43  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
1802017-06-23T08:26:52  *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1812017-06-23T08:37:55  *** riemann has quit IRC
1822017-06-23T08:38:15  *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1832017-06-23T08:44:35  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8c2098ad1209...e2921405dff1
1842017-06-23T08:44:35  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 92fb8bd Jonas Schnelli: Slightly overhaul NSI pixmaps
1852017-06-23T08:44:36  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master e292140 Jonas Schnelli: Merge #10644: Slightly overhaul NSI pixmaps...
1862017-06-23T08:45:09  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #10644: Slightly overhaul NSI pixmaps (master...2017/06/cleanup) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10644
1872017-06-23T08:52:04  <luke-jr> blah, now there's an extra place to change "Core" :x
1882017-06-23T08:55:04  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: heh.. oh yes. But I guess you have already different pixmaps for Knots?
1892017-06-23T08:55:24  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: that one used to just be "bitcoin", so didn't need to change it I think
1902017-06-23T08:55:36  <jonasschnelli> Branding!
1912017-06-23T08:55:57  <luke-jr> I suppose there's no way to make the string part just a string? XD
1922017-06-23T08:56:54  <luke-jr> (FWIW, patch files can't touch binary files, so I do all pixmap changes via SVG rendering)
1932017-06-23T08:58:38  <jonasschnelli> Not worth... just replace the bmp for Knots...
1942017-06-23T08:59:05  <jonasschnelli> Or remove that commit in knots
1952017-06-23T08:59:09  *** sturles has quit IRC
1962017-06-23T08:59:30  <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: can't
1972017-06-23T08:59:50  <luke-jr> replacing bmp, even to undo that commit, changes a binary file => breaks patch files
1982017-06-23T08:59:50  <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: you can add a commit that restores the old pixmaps
1992017-06-23T09:00:39  <jonasschnelli> However you do it. :)
2002017-06-23T09:03:09  <wumpus> git patch can support binary files IIRC (--binary)
2012017-06-23T09:17:25  <luke-jr> wumpus: yes, but not normal patch (IIRC there was some practical issues to using git-patch also, but I forget what)
2022017-06-23T09:26:04  *** ProfMac_ has quit IRC
2032017-06-23T09:30:34  *** sturles has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042017-06-23T09:35:20  *** bordeaux_facile has quit IRC
2052017-06-23T09:35:30  *** bordeaux_facile has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2062017-06-23T09:39:48  <wumpus> and otherwise just copy the binary files over, separately from the patch, 'patching' isn't very interesting in general for binary files unless there's some specific  diff/mutation tool for that specific kind of file
2072017-06-23T09:40:18  <wumpus> (which I guess is true for images! you could use python+PIL to render a different logo over the old one lol)
2082017-06-23T09:43:40  *** ProfMac_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2092017-06-23T09:49:09  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2102017-06-23T10:06:31  * wumpus really likes c++17 std::optional, what took them so long
2112017-06-23T10:08:01  <wumpus> I'm surprised complex features such as lambdas made it into c++11, but not something as straightforward as an optional value
2122017-06-23T10:24:18  *** SopaXorzTaker has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132017-06-23T10:47:51  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2142017-06-23T11:40:11  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2152017-06-23T11:41:54  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2162017-06-23T12:00:39  *** random has quit IRC
2172017-06-23T12:03:47  *** ula has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2182017-06-23T12:07:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
2192017-06-23T12:08:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202017-06-23T12:16:33  *** echonaut4 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2212017-06-23T12:17:41  *** echonaut has quit IRC
2222017-06-23T12:29:05  *** afk11 has quit IRC
2232017-06-23T12:29:35  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242017-06-23T12:35:58  *** neel has quit IRC
2252017-06-23T12:37:25  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262017-06-23T12:37:38  *** neel has quit IRC
2272017-06-23T12:37:44  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2282017-06-23T12:43:15  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292017-06-23T12:49:09  *** riemann has quit IRC
2302017-06-23T13:19:16  *** belcher has quit IRC
2312017-06-23T13:23:47  *** Gnof has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2322017-06-23T13:27:36  *** riemann has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332017-06-23T13:29:11  *** neel has quit IRC
2342017-06-23T13:35:32  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2352017-06-23T13:40:46  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2362017-06-23T14:00:05  *** belcher has quit IRC
2372017-06-23T14:07:20  *** arubi_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2382017-06-23T14:09:21  *** arubi has quit IRC
2392017-06-23T14:11:51  *** BCBot_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2402017-06-23T14:12:58  *** BCBot has quit IRC
2412017-06-23T14:19:27  *** bordeaux_facile has quit IRC
2422017-06-23T14:19:47  *** bordeaux_facile has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432017-06-23T14:20:58  *** bordeaux_facile has quit IRC
2442017-06-23T14:21:55  *** BCBot_ has quit IRC
2452017-06-23T14:22:13  *** BCBot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2462017-06-23T14:23:03  *** bordeaux_facile has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472017-06-23T14:23:47  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482017-06-23T14:57:11  *** riemann has quit IRC
2492017-06-23T15:02:20  *** neel has quit IRC
2502017-06-23T15:52:36  *** abpa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2512017-06-23T15:52:50  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522017-06-23T15:54:28  *** neel has quit IRC
2532017-06-23T16:07:02  *** d9b4bef9 has quit IRC
2542017-06-23T16:08:07  *** d9b4bef9 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552017-06-23T16:08:14  *** arubi_ is now known as arubi
2562017-06-23T16:10:57  <sipa> wumpus: with lambdas you can emulate optional using church encoding :)
2572017-06-23T16:13:01  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2582017-06-23T16:14:02  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592017-06-23T16:17:19  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602017-06-23T16:18:44  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2612017-06-23T16:21:31  *** laurentmt has quit IRC
2622017-06-23T16:22:35  *** altoz has quit IRC
2632017-06-23T16:36:51  *** neel has quit IRC
2642017-06-23T16:39:02  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2652017-06-23T16:39:43  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2662017-06-23T16:40:13  *** neel has quit IRC
2672017-06-23T16:53:30  *** goatpig has quit IRC
2682017-06-23T16:58:19  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2692017-06-23T17:14:37  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2702017-06-23T17:35:11  *** nakaluna has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2712017-06-23T17:45:44  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2722017-06-23T17:53:36  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
2732017-06-23T17:53:42  *** timothy has quit IRC
2742017-06-23T17:55:52  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2752017-06-23T17:58:34  *** arubi has quit IRC
2762017-06-23T17:59:04  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2772017-06-23T18:14:31  *** max900 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2782017-06-23T18:27:23  *** CubicEarth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2792017-06-23T18:27:47  *** neel has quit IRC
2802017-06-23T18:29:20  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2812017-06-23T18:46:17  *** SopaXorzTaker has quit IRC
2822017-06-23T19:04:30  *** max900 has quit IRC
2832017-06-23T19:35:36  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] ryanofsky opened pull request #10661: Add multiwallet support to wallet RPCs (master...pr/multiopt) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10661
2842017-06-23T19:59:48  *** Dyaheon has quit IRC
2852017-06-23T20:00:29  *** Dyaheon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2862017-06-23T20:24:27  *** Yogaqueef has quit IRC
2872017-06-23T20:27:34  *** Gnof has quit IRC
2882017-06-23T20:34:46  *** neel has quit IRC
2892017-06-23T20:54:40  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2902017-06-23T21:05:48  *** neel_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2912017-06-23T21:07:57  *** neel has quit IRC
2922017-06-23T21:21:41  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] achow101 opened pull request #10662: Initialize randomness in benchmarks (master...fix-bench) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/10662
2932017-06-23T21:27:50  *** ananteris has quit IRC
2942017-06-23T21:35:38  *** CubicEarth has quit IRC
2952017-06-23T21:57:46  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962017-06-23T22:06:16  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
2972017-06-23T22:06:52  *** neel_ has quit IRC
2982017-06-23T22:09:52  *** spinza has quit IRC
2992017-06-23T22:20:48  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3002017-06-23T22:21:57  *** davec has quit IRC
3012017-06-23T22:35:04  *** neel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3022017-06-23T22:42:36  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3032017-06-23T22:43:56  *** jtimon has quit IRC
3042017-06-23T22:44:00  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3052017-06-23T22:52:59  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3062017-06-23T22:56:50  *** nemgun has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3072017-06-23T23:12:58  *** chjj has quit IRC
3082017-06-23T23:17:35  *** nakaluna has quit IRC
3092017-06-23T23:20:23  *** neel has quit IRC
3102017-06-23T23:34:46  *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3112017-06-23T23:46:34  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3122017-06-23T23:47:18  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3132017-06-23T23:59:16  *** abpa has quit IRC