1 2015-12-02T00:06:47  <GitHub81> [bitcoin] gmaxwell closed pull request #7100: Replace setInventoryKnown with a rolling bloom filter. (master...known_bloom) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7100
  2 2015-12-02T00:31:19  *** Guest46010 has quit IRC
  3 2015-12-02T00:31:20  *** Guest46010 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  4 2015-12-02T00:31:20  *** Guest46010 is now known as amiller
  5 2015-12-02T01:27:58  *** JackH has quit IRC
  6 2015-12-02T01:44:33  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
  7 2015-12-02T01:49:03  *** randy-waterhouse has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  8 2015-12-02T01:51:59  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  9 2015-12-02T02:37:40  *** calibre720 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 10 2015-12-02T02:56:07  *** belcher has quit IRC
 11 2015-12-02T02:58:31  *** calibre720 has quit IRC
 12 2015-12-02T03:03:08  *** CodeShark_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 13 2015-12-02T03:04:38  <GitHub159> [bitcoin] gmaxwell closed pull request #7037: Move the blocknotify callback ahead of peer announcement. (master...notify_early) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7037
 14 2015-12-02T03:40:18  *** calibre720 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 15 2015-12-02T03:57:39  *** CodeShark_ has quit IRC
 16 2015-12-02T04:52:14  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 17 2015-12-02T05:00:50  *** CodeShark_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 18 2015-12-02T05:11:58  *** CodeShark_ has quit IRC
 19 2015-12-02T05:32:07  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: there is no consensus, when reasonable dissent remains.
 20 2015-12-02T05:32:56  <dcousens> Luke-Jr: well, this is a policy based thing isn't it?
 21 2015-12-02T05:33:15  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: yes, it doesn't strictly *need* consensus. Just saying.
 22 2015-12-02T05:33:20  <dcousens> and my point was, at least the impression from those IRC logs, was, that reasonable dissent didn't exist beyond your concerns
 23 2015-12-02T05:33:24  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: lets try to be productive and figure out something that works for everyone.
 24 2015-12-02T05:33:40  <dcousens> (not to down play your concerns at all, fwiw)
 25 2015-12-02T05:33:49  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: "reasonable dissent didn't exist beyond reasonable dissent" does not make sense.
 26 2015-12-02T05:34:12  <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I see no benefit whatsoever to changing the default policy in a way that is clearly harmful to Bitcoin.
 27 2015-12-02T05:34:24  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: right now with the mempool behavior, inserting priority back into the process has an astronomical performance hit that directly drives people shortcutting validation.  That fact remains, as does the fact that priority is useful too.
 28 2015-12-02T05:34:38  <dcousens> well, I'm not in the position to say whether it was reasonable or not,
 29 2015-12-02T05:34:57  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: slow block generation is clearly harmful to Bitcoin, in a way which I think is worse than loss of priority.
 30 2015-12-02T05:35:03  <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: that fact does not remain. The CNB rewrite fixed it.
 31 2015-12-02T05:35:19  <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: priority no longer has any significant performance penalty
 32 2015-12-02T05:35:49  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: I thought you were also trying to undo the only compute priority at mempool entry change too?
 33 2015-12-02T05:36:17  <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: that also is insignificant, but less concerning (other than the fact that it requires miners to apply code patches to fix)
 34 2015-12-02T05:36:46  <Luke-Jr> (I mean, fixing that also would not have a notable performance penalty)
 35 2015-12-02T05:37:58  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: 'accurate' priority requires traversing every free transaction in the mempool to build the block, even if only a few are included.
 36 2015-12-02T05:38:58  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: what is your view of the argument that priority is effectively only available to very few users; because most people don't have a stack of year old txouts stiting around?
 37 2015-12-02T05:40:04  <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: specifically, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7149 fixes the priority calculation without adding any such loop to CNB
 38 2015-12-02T05:40:55  <jgarzik> how many tx per day get confirmed solely due to priority - measure field use
 39 2015-12-02T05:40:56  <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: "Bitcoin only works for users with lots of bitcoins during spam attacks" is much better than "Bitcoin doesn't work during spam attacks period"
 40 2015-12-02T05:41:38  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: okay, I hadn't seen that PR. it might change my opinion. I think if we can prevent there from being bad performance or memory usage effects we should preserve it.
 41 2015-12-02T05:42:12  <Luke-Jr> it adds a dobule + unsigned int per mempooltx
 42 2015-12-02T05:42:15  <Luke-Jr> double*
 43 2015-12-02T05:42:22  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: Thus far, spending one or two _cents_ for an ordinary sized transaction has been more than enough to get it past all the spam attacks that I've looked at.
 44 2015-12-02T05:42:55  <gmaxwell> so I think the "doesn't work" is hyperbole, especially with the belief that most users simply don't have access to priority in the way that you or I do.
 45 2015-12-02T05:43:50  <dcousens> Luke-Jr: "doesn't work"?  just add a higher fee?
 46 2015-12-02T05:43:58  <Luke-Jr> jgarzik: gmaxwell: that is the same kind of argument for skipping validation. the rate of attempted bogus blocks is zero, so why check them?
 47 2015-12-02T05:44:35  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: many people cannot add higher fees yet
 48 2015-12-02T05:44:44  <dcousens> Luke-Jr: why not?
 49 2015-12-02T05:44:45  <Luke-Jr> maybe in some post-RBF-wallet world, priority can safely be removed
 50 2015-12-02T05:44:50  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: I don't think it is; because the kind of harm caused is different. If there is no priority than no one has a strong assumption that there will be priority.
 51 2015-12-02T05:45:13  <dcousens> Luke-Jr: isn't that we're moving towards?
 52 2015-12-02T05:45:20  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: yes, but we're not there.
 53 2015-12-02T05:45:28  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: good argument. So you would point out that priority can rescue transactions which would otherwise be massively delayed absent the ability to revise their fees.
 54 2015-12-02T05:46:14  <gmaxwell> This sounds like something we could actually check. like how many transactions in blocks now (even ones cherry picked to be not-spam) would have been priority eligible at all; or would become eligible within 24-36 hours.
 55 2015-12-02T05:46:21  <dcousens> gmaxwell: indeed
 56 2015-12-02T05:46:40  <dcousens> morcos: ? :P
 57 2015-12-02T05:46:50  <gmaxwell> pfft; morcos is not our stats monkey. :)
 58 2015-12-02T05:46:57  <dcousens> haha
 59 2015-12-02T05:47:00  <Luke-Jr> we have a stats monkey? :o
 60 2015-12-02T05:47:03  <gmaxwell> (except for his own PRs :) )
 61 2015-12-02T05:47:07  <gmaxwell> No, but perhaps we should.
 62 2015-12-02T05:47:22  <gmaxwell> but where will we get the suit?
 63 2015-12-02T05:48:48  <gmaxwell> in any case, I think if we can make an objective case that it has a use for people other than me and you, and we can prefer a performance hit.. then great. It would considerable extra work to maintain the functionality. (though this is my view; and wumpus is not around to kick my ass for it right now)
 64 2015-12-02T05:49:11  <gmaxwell> But if either of these things are not true; then we might have to swallow the pill.
 65 2015-12-02T05:53:19  <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: I was not able to fully parse your longest line.
 66 2015-12-02T05:54:34  <gmaxwell> it would be worth performing extra work to maintain priority if the above two conditions (can do it without breaking performance; can show that it would be helpful for existing users under hypothetical attack conditions)
 67 2015-12-02T05:57:56  <tulip> I'm not sure I've seen any wallet software which actually takes priority into account when making a transaction.
 68 2015-12-02T05:58:34  *** calibre720 has quit IRC
 69 2015-12-02T06:00:42  <Luke-Jr> tulip: it doesn't need to
 70 2015-12-02T06:01:08  <Luke-Jr> and at least my Bitcoin LJR wallet does (although I understand 0.12 won't)
 71 2015-12-02T06:02:13  <dcousens> Luke-Jr: I think tulip's point is,  if the wallet doesn't account for it, then, likely, it'll probably just assume it needs to pay a higher fee under attack conditions anyway
 72 2015-12-02T06:02:34  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: there are no wallets that correctly figure the right fee :/
 73 2015-12-02T06:02:46  <dcousens> Luke-Jr: what is the "right" fee?
 74 2015-12-02T06:02:57  <dcousens> its just something high enough, right?
 75 2015-12-02T06:04:06  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: more or less
 76 2015-12-02T06:04:32  <dcousens> well, the wallets I use usually have a 4c fee
 77 2015-12-02T06:04:35  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: most wallets just assume it's some fixed rate per kB, and can't take spam conditions into account at all
 78 2015-12-02T06:04:38  <dcousens> and I've never had an issue
 79 2015-12-02T06:05:11  <dcousens> Luke-Jr: eh, the ones I use `estimatefee`
 80 2015-12-02T06:05:11  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: this is tangent
 81 2015-12-02T06:05:14  <dcousens> agreed
 82 2015-12-02T06:05:49  * Luke-Jr ponders if there's any way to parallelize git bisect
 83 2015-12-02T06:11:47  *** guest234234 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 84 2015-12-02T06:12:22  <tulip> Luke-Jr: I think at least one popular wallet has a proxy for Bitcoin Cores estimatefee built in.
 85 2015-12-02T06:13:17  <Luke-Jr> estimatefee is not accurate during spam attacks
 86 2015-12-02T06:16:49  <tulip> then I suppose no wallet estimates fees correctly.
 87 2015-12-02T06:20:31  <gmaxwell> If an attack begins, the estimate may have been too low (though you need to overestimate if you are unable to replace); and then maybe priority saves you.
 88 2015-12-02T06:21:04  <dcousens> gmaxwell: so maybe we need a mempool reactive estimatefee?
 89 2015-12-02T06:22:43  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: that won't work if the spam starts after you send
 90 2015-12-02T06:22:55  <Luke-Jr> RBF is the only way to really fix this
 91 2015-12-02T06:23:02  <gmaxwell> estimatefee is mempool reactive, but it can't predict the future.
 92 2015-12-02T06:23:36  <dcousens> seems we were answering two different questions, I'm talking about: "what should my fee be right now"
 93 2015-12-02T06:24:04  <dcousens> you're talking about "what should my fee be to ensure no matter what happens, I get in the next block"
 94 2015-12-02T06:24:18  <dcousens> the latter isn't possible in market, so, the most you can do is "right now" + RBF
 95 2015-12-02T06:24:39  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: s/next block/next day/ or even next week
 96 2015-12-02T06:24:57  <Luke-Jr> "what should my fee be right now" makes no sense alone
 97 2015-12-02T06:25:15  <dcousens> "given the mempool"
 98 2015-12-02T06:25:21  <Luke-Jr> still
 99 2015-12-02T06:25:24  <dcousens> obviously your mempool is also subjective
100 2015-12-02T06:25:24  <Luke-Jr> you need a *goal*
101 2015-12-02T06:25:29  <dcousens> why?
102 2015-12-02T06:25:38  <Luke-Jr> because without a goal, there is no "should be" at all
103 2015-12-02T06:25:54  <Luke-Jr> might as well just do no fee, and wait for some generous miner to pick it up
104 2015-12-02T06:25:56  *** calibre720 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
105 2015-12-02T06:26:32  <dcousens> Luke-Jr: but you can't really reason about anything other than competing with other txs for the current block
106 2015-12-02T06:26:46  <dcousens> if you say my goal is "within 3 blocks", its irrelevant
107 2015-12-02T06:26:50  <Luke-Jr> …
108 2015-12-02T06:27:08  <dcousens> its still always going to be within "the next block"
109 2015-12-02T06:27:09  <Luke-Jr> sounds like you just defined your goal as "next block"
110 2015-12-02T06:27:24  <dcousens> IMHO, that can be the only role of a fee
111 2015-12-02T06:27:26  <Luke-Jr> …
112 2015-12-02T06:28:04  *** guest234234 has quit IRC
113 2015-12-02T06:28:06  <aj> dcousens: "one of the next dozen blocks" is perfectly reasonable. if you want to parse that as "the next block, or else the next block, or else the next block, ..." i guess that's equivalent...
114 2015-12-02T06:28:27  <dcousens> "one of the next dozen blocks", but thats implying you can predict the future
115 2015-12-02T06:28:39  <dcousens> which is to say, at some point, if not the next, the market is going to be less competetive
116 2015-12-02T06:29:02  <gmaxwell> dcousens: the point is that you could target 6 blocks, then twelve blocks of higher paying spam suddenly show up.
117 2015-12-02T06:29:19  <dcousens> gmaxwell: thats my point, saying I target 6 blocks makes no sense IMHO
118 2015-12-02T06:29:22  <aj> dcousens: if a block is found in 2 minutes, there'll be less competition than for a block that's found after 1h30m
119 2015-12-02T06:29:34  <dcousens> because, all that really matters is whats competeting for a block right now
120 2015-12-02T06:29:42  <gmaxwell> dcousens: even if you target _now_ the next second 12 blocks worth of spam shows up.
121 2015-12-02T06:29:55  <dcousens> gmaxwell: exactly
122 2015-12-02T06:29:58  <gmaxwell> The estimator measures that competition retrospectively.
123 2015-12-02T06:30:06  <dcousens> gmaxwell: which is why "right now" + RBF is the only solution
124 2015-12-02T06:30:17  <dcousens> having a target other than "right now" is implying you can predict the future
125 2015-12-02T06:30:22  <gmaxwell> it doesn't just say "how do I get N blocks into the pool" it says "transactions paying this much too how long?"
126 2015-12-02T06:30:28  <gmaxwell> s/too/took/
127 2015-12-02T06:30:48  <gmaxwell> You can predict the future if the future is like the past; which is usually true.
128 2015-12-02T06:30:51  *** calibre720 has quit IRC
129 2015-12-02T06:30:58  <gmaxwell> But you can't predict the black swans.
130 2015-12-02T06:31:02  <dcousens> gmaxwell: until something like a spam attack happens
131 2015-12-02T06:31:08  <dcousens> which is exactly why we're talking about this
132 2015-12-02T06:31:39  <dcousens> and hence, if we're talking about how to 'correctly' estimate a fee, then, "right now" + RBF is your only true best chance
133 2015-12-02T06:31:54  <gmaxwell> In any case, luke believes that priority is actually a useful backstop. It's certantly something that is hard for attacks to abuse, at least.
134 2015-12-02T06:32:27  <gmaxwell> dcousens: even N blocks + RBF is fine.   N blocks, assuming nothing changes; and RBF for those times when it does.
135 2015-12-02T06:33:00  <gmaxwell> (keep in mind that mining is a posson process; as is new transaction entry. N blocks really does make sense statistically)
136 2015-12-02T06:33:39  <dcousens> gmaxwell: only if transaction priority/age matters
137 2015-12-02T06:33:46  <gmaxwell> No.
138 2015-12-02T06:34:18  <gmaxwell> Paying for block N, N>0  is making a bet on the rate of block finding and/or the rate of new transactions showing up.
139 2015-12-02T06:34:46  <dcousens> if 6 blocks have even competition, aka, the mempool is consistently full, they'll just continually skim the top of the pile, if you fail to make it over that threshold, no matter what your prediction was originally, you won't make it in?
140 2015-12-02T06:35:07  <dcousens> N blocks only makes sense if the system wasn't changing after your entry?
141 2015-12-02T06:35:50  <gmaxwell> Thats why the estimator is based on past performance.
142 2015-12-02T06:36:11  <dcousens> gmaxwell: which is why its a prediction, and not necessarily a 'correct' estimate :)
143 2015-12-02T06:36:45  <gmaxwell> You can look at it as the question, because of variance in tx entry and block findinging; mining goes deeper into the mempool with declining probablity the deeper it goes.
144 2015-12-02T06:37:04  <Luke-Jr> dcousens: right now, to get the next block, you need a fee like 0.88 mBTC; but if you're okay with up to 25 blocks, 0.01 mBTC is probably fine
145 2015-12-02T06:37:16  <gmaxwell> Yes, and thats where the RBF and CPFP come in. They let you use a prediction without grave outcomes.
146 2015-12-02T06:37:25  <Luke-Jr> and these are just small numbers
147 2015-12-02T06:37:57  <Luke-Jr> it makes a lot more sense to target 1, 144 (24 hours), or 1008 (1 week) blocks
148 2015-12-02T06:38:00  <Luke-Jr> IMO
149 2015-12-02T06:38:25  <Luke-Jr> the difference is fees needed for those is likely to be even more pronounced
150 2015-12-02T06:38:27  <gmaxwell> well 1008 is unfortunately incompatible with current mempool policy but I hope we improve that in the future. (e.g. be being able to save the mempool to disk)
151 2015-12-02T06:38:48  <Luke-Jr> yes, I'm just saying ideally
152 2015-12-02T06:38:53  <gmaxwell> (and by changing the 72 hour timeout to 1week for RBF transactions)
153 2015-12-02T06:39:21  <Luke-Jr> also once there's RBF for continually re-estimating fees needed, estimates can be a lot less accurate
154 2015-12-02T06:39:26  <Luke-Jr> can afford to be*
155 2015-12-02T06:39:42  <gmaxwell> As I've pointed out before, if the load has a cycle with period Q, then you cannot make efficient use of the system without at least Q worth of storage... and there clearly is a weekly cycle in load.
156 2015-12-02T06:40:35  <Luke-Jr> 1 GB of storage just for the mempool, with 1 MB blocks.. :x
157 2015-12-02T06:40:58  <Luke-Jr> maybe I should be trying to solve this in my mempool work
158 2015-12-02T06:41:11  <Luke-Jr> s/solve/make this reasonably possible without RAM/
159 2015-12-02T06:41:24  <gmaxwell> well I think thats not really a big deal; mempool shouldn't be in ram.
160 2015-12-02T06:41:34  <Luke-Jr> right.. that's what I mean
161 2015-12-02T06:41:42  <dcousens> gmaxwell: the rational miner algorithm is just:  mempoolTxs.sort(byFee).takeAtMost(marketDerivedN)  (with size in there somewhere),  therefore,  if you want to get in the blockchain,  you just need to be in that cut, why would a miner care about how long a transaction has been waiting for?
162 2015-12-02T06:41:51  <Luke-Jr> maybe I should restart my mempool changes, and this time move it to disk in the proces
163 2015-12-02T06:42:33  <gmaxwell> dcousens: it doesn't. But reality cares. More time means greater odds that there were a number of fast blocks that cleared out the backlog.
164 2015-12-02T06:42:50  <gmaxwell> (faster than new high fee tx arrived)
165 2015-12-02T06:43:22  *** calibre720 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
166 2015-12-02T06:43:26  <dcousens> gmaxwell: assuming a constant tx rate
167 2015-12-02T06:44:01  <gmaxwell> e.g. you want to get in within 25 blocks, what you end up paying would put you (say) 4 blocks deep in the mempool, but given new tx coming in, it was 12 blocks out before miners got lucky enough that you were in the top $blocksize.
168 2015-12-02T06:44:21  <dcousens> which still puts it as a prediction,  versus just persistently watching the pool and instead competeting the entire time (no guarantee still, obv, but, its probably the most 'correct')
169 2015-12-02T06:44:22  <gmaxwell> or 12 blocks out before the rate of tx coming in hit a slump, or a mixture of the two.
170 2015-12-02T06:44:51  <gmaxwell> yes, indeed. well replacements have a cost with RBF... as you must increment by at least the entry amount.
171 2015-12-02T06:44:58  <gmaxwell> and you lose privacy when you use it.
172 2015-12-02T06:45:19  <gmaxwell> (it identifies your change)
173 2015-12-02T06:45:32  <dcousens> what's the privacy lost?
174 2015-12-02T06:45:39  <dcousens> nvm
175 2015-12-02T06:46:44  <gmaxwell> so I think being somewhat forward looking still make sense even with RBF.
176 2015-12-02T06:47:07  <dcousens> gmaxwell: indeed, its probably your best bet
177 2015-12-02T06:47:11  <dcousens> uh, a good bet*
178 2015-12-02T06:47:17  <dcousens> but you're best bet would be alternative
179 2015-12-02T06:47:39  <dcousens> but obviously it'll probably cost you more etc
180 2015-12-02T06:48:56  <gmaxwell> I mean, many things are possible including the possiblity of having an totally different unconfirmed transaction market mechenism. Like some server over tor that people connect to and do a great big auction to agree on fees and make a great big coinjoin to subit to the miners as a unit. :P
181 2015-12-02T06:49:13  <dcousens> haha, that'll be the day
182 2015-12-02T06:49:26  <dcousens> and yeah, the coinjoin would subvert the orthogonal issue of privacy loss during RBF
183 2015-12-02T06:49:38  <dcousens> at least, the loss of privacy to the network
184 2015-12-02T06:49:43  <gmaxwell> also the fact that you'd agree on .. right.
185 2015-12-02T06:49:56  <gmaxwell> I mean, this is effectively what joinmarket is... well joinmarket is the MVP version of that.
186 2015-12-02T06:50:01  <aj> gmaxwell: oh, wow, a bitcoin user's union putting the screws into the Big Business of corporate mining!
187 2015-12-02T06:50:14  <gmaxwell> aj: the word is "buyers cartel"
188 2015-12-02T06:50:18  <dcousens> haha
189 2015-12-02T06:50:32  <aj> gmaxwell: maybe in the literature, but that's not how you market it man!
190 2015-12-02T06:51:03  <gmaxwell> my earliest posts on bitcoin talk were worrying about mining cartels driving up fee prices, then I realized buyers cartels were possible too and worried less about that. :P
191 2015-12-02T06:52:21  <gmaxwell> an interesting thing you can do is do the bidding for fees and then round robin distribute them to transactions, so that the miners just see N transactions which each page the average feerate, and can't cherrypick the higer paying bidders.
192 2015-12-02T06:53:36  <GitHub195> [bitcoin] posita opened pull request #7152: Add missing automake package to deb-based UNIX install instructions. (master...posita/fix-doc-build-unix) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7152
193 2015-12-02T06:55:56  <GitHub77> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #6997: Don't use hard-coded AllowFree, as this is usually far too low. (master...no-default-free-priority) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6997
194 2015-12-02T07:20:21  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
195 2015-12-02T07:27:46  *** calibre720 has quit IRC
196 2015-12-02T07:32:39  *** dcousens has quit IRC
197 2015-12-02T07:34:49  *** paveljanik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
198 2015-12-02T07:37:47  <GitHub128> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #7153: [Tests] Add mempool_limit.py test (master...2015/12/mempool-test) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7153
199 2015-12-02T07:39:31  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
200 2015-12-02T07:40:17  <GitHub61> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli opened pull request #7154: [Qt] add InMempool() info to transaction details (master...2015/12/qt_conflicts) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7154
201 2015-12-02T07:41:47  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
202 2015-12-02T08:00:18  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
203 2015-12-02T08:07:20  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
204 2015-12-02T08:16:15  *** CodeShark_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
205 2015-12-02T08:40:17  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
206 2015-12-02T08:43:29  <GitHub147> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4077ad20d03f...4a63f9467606
207 2015-12-02T08:43:30  <GitHub147> bitcoin/master b171c69 Michael Ford: [doc] Update OS X build notes for new qt5 configure...
208 2015-12-02T08:43:30  <GitHub147> bitcoin/master 4a63f94 Jonas Schnelli: Merge pull request #7040...
209 2015-12-02T08:43:37  <GitHub44> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #7040: [doc] Update OS X build notes for new qt5 configure (master...patch-4) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7040
210 2015-12-02T08:51:32  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
211 2015-12-02T08:53:08  *** tulip has quit IRC
212 2015-12-02T09:04:30  *** BashCo has quit IRC
213 2015-12-02T09:12:12  *** dcousens has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
214 2015-12-02T09:17:42  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
215 2015-12-02T09:18:16  <GitHub36> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 7 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/4a63f9467606...bdda4d567eed
216 2015-12-02T09:18:17  <GitHub36> bitcoin/master 74d0f90 Matt Corallo: Add method to remove a tx from CCoinsViewCache if it is unchanged
217 2015-12-02T09:18:17  <GitHub36> bitcoin/master b2e74bd Matt Corallo: Get the set of now-uncacheable-txn from CTxMemPool::TrimToSize
218 2015-12-02T09:18:18  <GitHub36> bitcoin/master 677aa3d Matt Corallo: Discard txn cache entries that were loaded for removed mempool txn
219 2015-12-02T09:18:21  <GitHub195> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6872: Remove UTXO cache entries when the tx they were added for is removed/does not enter mempool (master...limitucache) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6872
220 2015-12-02T09:18:41  <GitHub34> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/bdda4d567eed...1b0241fcec3e
221 2015-12-02T09:18:42  <GitHub34> bitcoin/master 8f0d79e Wladimir J. van der Laan: test: Disable scheduler test manythreads...
222 2015-12-02T09:18:42  <GitHub34> bitcoin/master 1b0241f Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7144...
223 2015-12-02T09:18:44  <GitHub130> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7144: test: Disable scheduler test manythreads (master...2015_12_disable_schedulertest) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7144
224 2015-12-02T09:29:51  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
225 2015-12-02T09:31:57  *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
226 2015-12-02T09:33:48  *** guest234234 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
227 2015-12-02T09:35:15  <jonasschnelli> Would changing the github bitcoin identity avatar image makes sense?
228 2015-12-02T09:35:29  <jonasschnelli> from https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/528860?v=3&s=200 to https://raw.githubusercontent.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/master/src/qt/res/icons/bitcoin.png
229 2015-12-02T09:36:05  <jonasschnelli> the current icon looks like a biniki, which is nice,.. but...
230 2015-12-02T09:36:17  <wumpus> yes I kinda like the current one
231 2015-12-02T09:36:54  <gmaxwell> It's one of those mcdonalds ghosts.
232 2015-12-02T09:36:58  <wumpus> I agree it may be more sensible to you know, put the logo there, but I don't know :-)
233 2015-12-02T09:37:21  <gmaxwell> hehe.
234 2015-12-02T09:39:51  <jonasschnelli> i think only wumpus and gavinandresen can change it
235 2015-12-02T09:40:15  <jonasschnelli> but no strong opinion... I juts think it looks "unfinished".
236 2015-12-02T09:41:23  <paveljanik> yay, we can change it weekly or per event - like google does with its logo 8)
237 2015-12-02T09:41:25  <wumpus> which is somehwo appropriate
238 2015-12-02T09:41:43  <paveljanik> lets scale the logo for today 8)
239 2015-12-02T09:41:55  <wumpus> it IS far from finished :-)
240 2015-12-02T09:42:09  <jonasschnelli> hah.. that true.
241 2015-12-02T09:45:02  <gmaxwell> "What do you mean you want bigger blocks? Cant you already see the pixels? they're super chunky now!"
242 2015-12-02T09:45:07  <wumpus> paveljanik: haha before you know you get requests to change the logo to a smaller denomination because that would sell more bitcoins *ducks*
243 2015-12-02T09:46:04  <wumpus> it doesn't get blockier than this
244 2015-12-02T09:47:14  <gmaxwell> "no no, bitcoin is deflationary; the logo must get smaller over time."
245 2015-12-02T09:47:22  <wumpus> that 1024x1024 logo is so subpixel-perfectly round, there's no blocks and no block chain in it!
246 2015-12-02T09:49:45  <wumpus> it also has no decentralization
247 2015-12-02T09:50:14  <gmaxwell> well a couple seconds in gimp and it can be as decentered as you want.
248 2015-12-02T09:50:57  <wumpus> but just moving the center is not decentralization!
249 2015-12-02T09:52:47  <gmaxwell> You can also _erase_ the center!
250 2015-12-02T09:55:10  <wumpus> ah yes a hole in the middle like some coins do have
251 2015-12-02T09:55:55  <wumpus> also used to happen someties with the 1 and 2 euro coins which consist of two materials, where the center dropped out
252 2015-12-02T09:56:04  <wumpus> not sure if symbolic
253 2015-12-02T09:57:11  <paveljanik> our 50CZK (~2EUR) coin is still like this...
254 2015-12-02T09:59:50  <Luke-Jr> just make it a QR code with a HD wallet seed that has 1 BTC in it, and see how long people take to notice
255 2015-12-02T09:59:53  <Luke-Jr> <.<
256 2015-12-02T10:00:47  <Luke-Jr> of course, since I just said that here, there's probably 10 people writing bots to automatically check it..
257 2015-12-02T10:01:32  *** tulip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
258 2015-12-02T10:01:36  <wumpus> right, from now on everyone checks our images very carefully for hidden QR codes and steganography
259 2015-12-02T10:03:41  <gmaxwell> I've probably mentioned it before; but there was some troll group ("GNAA") that started contributing illustrations to wikipedia that secretly coded "GNAA" in them. I knew about them all over the place, but the illustrationwere so useful we just let them keep on doing it.
260 2015-12-02T10:04:05  <Luke-Jr> lol
261 2015-12-02T10:04:42  <Luke-Jr> gmaxwell: someone checked they weren't copyrighted by other, right?
262 2015-12-02T10:05:29  <gmaxwell> Luke-Jr: yea, we were pretty sure they were drawing them.
263 2015-12-02T10:06:03  <wumpus> haha reminds me of http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2009-07-16-n41.html
264 2015-12-02T10:06:05  <Luke-Jr> if only our trolls were that dedicated :<
265 2015-12-02T10:06:46  <gmaxwell> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpendicular_recording#Technology  < this was one (someone since might have fixed it, I didn't check.. but you can see the example is 32 bits long...)
266 2015-12-02T10:08:40  <wumpus> (or, more like the idea of blog post spammers that give such useful answers that they're almost excused adding a hidden spam link)
267 2015-12-02T10:09:28  <wumpus> gmaxwell: hah, that's so obscure and harmless
268 2015-12-02T10:10:40  <wumpus> yes definitely another class of troll than our trolls Luke-Jr
269 2015-12-02T10:25:38  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
270 2015-12-02T10:27:19  <MarcoFalke> wumpus, So I update to pull from https://github.com/bitcoin/univalue now
271 2015-12-02T10:27:32  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: sure!
272 2015-12-02T10:28:56  <GitHub125> [bitcoin] petertodd opened pull request #7155: Remove old replace-by-fee tests (master...2015-12-remove-old-rbf-tests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7155
273 2015-12-02T10:32:05  <sipa> wumpus: there is some annoying github logic if you just clone
274 2015-12-02T10:32:36  <wumpus> sipa: hm?
275 2015-12-02T10:32:50  <sipa> wumpus: as it will keep showing here and in all existing forks that jgarzik/univalue is upstream
276 2015-12-02T10:32:58  <sipa> or is that the intention?
277 2015-12-02T10:33:01  <wumpus> that's the intent
278 2015-12-02T10:33:10  <sipa> ok, no problem then
279 2015-12-02T10:33:49  <wumpus> I've updated the description for it "ork for bitcoin changes to univalue, upstream is https://github.com/jgarzik/univalue"  my idea is that it's similar to the leveldb one
280 2015-12-02T10:34:02  <sipa> ok
281 2015-12-02T10:37:47  <wumpus> but I agree on the annoying logic, there's AFAIK no way to 'unparent' a project so that it is no longer seen as a subsidiary fork
282 2015-12-02T10:37:56  <sipa> it is
283 2015-12-02T10:38:10  <sipa> you can move the repo to another project
284 2015-12-02T10:38:29  <sipa> which is what i should have done for secp
285 2015-12-02T10:39:29  <sipa> instead i just deleted & recreated
286 2015-12-02T10:42:12  <gmaxwell> speaking of secp256k1, you need to blank your personal repo again.
287 2015-12-02T10:44:48  <sipa> uh
288 2015-12-02T10:47:18  <gmaxwell> sipa: force push the master branch of mine onto yours, you overwrote it.
289 2015-12-02T11:01:15  <btcdrak> wumpus: alternatively jgarzik could push his repo to the bitcoin org
290 2015-12-02T11:01:25  <btcdrak> *transfer
291 2015-12-02T11:02:51  <wumpus> btcdrak: right
292 2015-12-02T11:05:59  <wumpus> btcdrak: although in  this specific case I'd prefer not to, part of the reason of splitting off subtrees is that they can have their own maintenance, it's just that in this case we want this patch in for 0.12 ASAP so have to act on our own a bit
293 2015-12-02T11:06:49  <btcdrak> wumpus: fair, but it would be better to have a few maintainers (ie people with push access) to repositories we rely on.
294 2015-12-02T11:07:35  <btcdrak> I see there's only 1 PR left in the 0.12 milestone! \o/
295 2015-12-02T11:08:08  <wumpus> yep the univalue is the last critical one
296 2015-12-02T11:09:48  <MarcoFalke> wumpus, #14 didn't get merged because unit tests fail?
297 2015-12-02T11:10:23  <wumpus> hm?
298 2015-12-02T11:10:42  <MarcoFalke> Expression: f != NULL
299 2015-12-02T11:10:42  <MarcoFalke> abnormal program termination
300 2015-12-02T11:10:42  <MarcoFalke> FAIL: test/unitester.exe
301 2015-12-02T11:10:42  <MarcoFalke> ====================================================
302 2015-12-02T11:10:42  <MarcoFalke> 1 of 1 test failed
303 2015-12-02T11:10:42  <MarcoFalke> Please report to http://github.com/jgarzik/univalue/
304 2015-12-02T11:10:42  <MarcoFalke> ====================================================
305 2015-12-02T11:10:45  <wumpus> where do you see that?
306 2015-12-02T11:10:50  <MarcoFalke> travis
307 2015-12-02T11:11:03  <wumpus> ============================================================================
308 2015-12-02T11:11:03  <wumpus> Testsuite summary for univalue 1.0.1
309 2015-12-02T11:11:03  <wumpus> ============================================================================
310 2015-12-02T11:11:03  <wumpus> # TOTAL: 1
311 2015-12-02T11:11:03  <wumpus> # PASS:  1
312 2015-12-02T11:11:12  <wumpus> no problems here
313 2015-12-02T11:11:51  <wumpus> also travis on https://github.com/jgarzik/univalue/pull/14 shows "all checks have passed"
314 2015-12-02T11:12:06  <wumpus> so I'm not sure where you get that reasoning from, no one is saying that in the pull either
315 2015-12-02T11:13:26  <wumpus> strange, I see bitcoin's travis does report that
316 2015-12-02T11:14:29  <wumpus> cannot reproduce it locally
317 2015-12-02T11:14:48  *** calibre720 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
318 2015-12-02T11:16:39  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: I guess I know the problem, the new test files added aren't part of Makefile.am's listing, and univalue's travis build doesn't do a 'make dist'
319 2015-12-02T11:22:42  <wumpus> (would be better to have a proper error in the tests that a file is missing instead of having to divine it from an assertion message)
320 2015-12-02T11:22:55  <MarcoFalke> Indeed.
321 2015-12-02T11:23:25  <MarcoFalke> Accidentally triggered https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/builds/94375864 . Mind to cancel?
322 2015-12-02T11:23:42  <wumpus> done
323 2015-12-02T11:43:18  <GitHub191> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1b0241fcec3e...3fd3b8617f2d
324 2015-12-02T11:43:19  <GitHub191> bitcoin/master 092e9ad Peter Todd: Remove old replace-by-fee tests...
325 2015-12-02T11:43:19  <GitHub191> bitcoin/master 3fd3b86 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7155...
326 2015-12-02T11:43:22  <GitHub104> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7155: Remove old replace-by-fee tests (master...2015-12-remove-old-rbf-tests) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7155
327 2015-12-02T11:44:24  <GitHub184> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3fd3b8617f2d...8e598dc4ea1d
328 2015-12-02T11:44:25  <GitHub184> bitcoin/master b212f94 Pavel Janík: Describe maxmempool and mempoolminfee in the getmempoolinfo RPC help.
329 2015-12-02T11:44:25  <GitHub184> bitcoin/master 8e598dc Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7118...
330 2015-12-02T11:44:32  <GitHub194> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7118: [Trivial, Doc] Describe maxmempool and mempoolminfee in the getmempoolinfo RPC help. (master...20151127_getmempoolinfo_fixes) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7118
331 2015-12-02T11:58:47  <GitHub143> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/8e598dc4ea1d...0dd194c917db
332 2015-12-02T11:58:47  <GitHub143> bitcoin/master 1812de9 Pavel Janík: Name union to prevent compiler warning
333 2015-12-02T11:58:48  <GitHub143> bitcoin/master 0dd194c Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7146...
334 2015-12-02T11:58:52  <GitHub87> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7146: Name union to prevent compiler warning (master...20151201_prevector_name_union) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7146
335 2015-12-02T11:59:22  *** dcousens has quit IRC
336 2015-12-02T12:03:34  *** calibre720 has quit IRC
337 2015-12-02T12:16:39  *** rubensayshi has quit IRC
338 2015-12-02T12:21:16  *** tulip has quit IRC
339 2015-12-02T12:26:09  *** tulip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
340 2015-12-02T12:27:12  <GitHub17> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 3 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0dd194c917db...7c7a05d27477
341 2015-12-02T12:27:13  <GitHub17> bitcoin/master 9827091 MarcoFalke: Squashed 'src/univalue/' changes from 5839ac3..2740c4f...
342 2015-12-02T12:27:13  <GitHub17> bitcoin/master fad4ea8 MarcoFalke: Merge commit '982709199f1b4e9e35211c419a81938f9f1dd4ed' into bitcoin
343 2015-12-02T12:27:14  <GitHub17> bitcoin/master 7c7a05d Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7147...
344 2015-12-02T12:27:22  <GitHub119> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7147: Univalue: Pull subtree (master...MarcoFalke-2015-univalueSync) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7147
345 2015-12-02T12:30:05  *** rubensayshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
346 2015-12-02T12:33:15  *** tulip has quit IRC
347 2015-12-02T12:55:06  <GitHub194> [bitcoin] laanwj opened pull request #7156: rpc: remove cs_main lock from `createrawtransaction` (master...2015_12_createrawtransaction_nolock) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7156
348 2015-12-02T12:56:17  <jgarzik> wumpus, MarcoFalke: Thanks - merged - ran it through the extended test suite in perl and found no problems there either
349 2015-12-02T12:57:19  <GitHub11> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/7c7a05d27477...83f06ca93736
350 2015-12-02T12:57:19  <GitHub11> bitcoin/master db6047d Peter Todd: Take the training wheels off anti-fee-sniping...
351 2015-12-02T12:57:19  <GitHub9> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #6216: Take the training wheels off anti-fee-sniping (master...take-training-wheels-off-fee-sniping) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/6216
352 2015-12-02T12:57:20  <GitHub11> bitcoin/master 83f06ca Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #6216...
353 2015-12-02T12:57:41  <wumpus> awesome
354 2015-12-02T12:58:25  *** tulip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
355 2015-12-02T12:59:29  <GitHub103> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7157: Fix typos and misc cleanup. (master...MarcoFalke-2015-trivial6) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7157
356 2015-12-02T12:59:30  <MarcoFalke> Meh, trivial...
357 2015-12-02T13:03:22  *** randy-waterhouse has quit IRC
358 2015-12-02T13:05:17  <morcos> gmaxwell: re load of cycle Q: i don't think you really need to store Q's worth of txs b/c you only need to store the backlog.  it seems somewhat unlikely that your load is going to present the entire weeks worth of tx's in the first 10 mins.
359 2015-12-02T13:06:23  <morcos> i don't know what the right answer is and it's possibly more than the existing back log capacity which is less than 1 day
360 2015-12-02T13:08:08  <morcos> Luke-Jr: agree with you that estimates for 1 to 25 are kind of useless.  i wrote code to modify the fee estimator to "efficiently" calculate up to 1008 while maintaining backwards compatibilty and still providing 1 through 25, but it was a tad complicated, and i was discouraged myself from reviewing it for correctness, so never published it.
361 2015-12-02T13:13:08  *** tulip has quit IRC
362 2015-12-02T13:13:43  <sipa> 1 to 25 what?
363 2015-12-02T13:13:54  <morcos> the target number of blocks
364 2015-12-02T13:14:20  <sipa> i miss context
365 2015-12-02T13:14:39  <sipa> ah, fee estimation?
366 2015-12-02T13:14:44  <morcos> wumpus: 7062 should be tagged with 0.12 as well.  i suppose its really a bug fix, and sdaftuar is going to add another commit to affect ATMP later today
367 2015-12-02T13:14:58  <wumpus> ok
368 2015-12-02T13:15:06  <morcos> sipa: yes, Luke-Jr was saying those are all small numbers and asking about 1, 144, and 1008 would be more meaningful
369 2015-12-02T13:15:30  <morcos> I agree that some sort of doubling is more useful 1,2,4,8 ... 1024
370 2015-12-02T13:15:46  <sipa> agree
371 2015-12-02T13:15:49  <morcos> i can't imagine needing to distinguish between 17 and 18
372 2015-12-02T13:16:06  <morcos> nor is possible
373 2015-12-02T13:17:01  <morcos> perhaps i should just get rid of the bakcwards compatibility, and i think the code will be significantly cleaner
374 2015-12-02T13:17:28  <morcos> but seems like it would be nice to take advantage of your old fee_estimates.dat
375 2015-12-02T13:17:50  <morcos> what's the right way to convert that.  build the converstion code into bitcoind or a standalone utility
376 2015-12-02T13:18:21  <sipa> inside bitcoind is certainly simpler
377 2015-12-02T13:18:32  <morcos> yeah just won't get used otherwise
378 2015-12-02T13:18:46  <morcos> luckly it has version information.  thanks gavin!
379 2015-12-02T13:18:57  <sipa> indeed
380 2015-12-02T13:27:43  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
381 2015-12-02T13:34:12  <GitHub162> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 1 new commit to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/93236c0455ded01f1af5d28f8be0801120a18ff2
382 2015-12-02T13:34:13  <GitHub162> bitcoin/master 93236c0 Wladimir J. van der Laan: qt: Final translation update before 0.12 fork...
383 2015-12-02T13:39:02  <GitHub117> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 2 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/93236c0455de...df2ced5c8325
384 2015-12-02T13:39:03  <GitHub117> bitcoin/master 02354c9 Luke Dashjr: Constrain rpcport default values to a single location in code
385 2015-12-02T13:39:03  <GitHub117> bitcoin/master df2ced5 Wladimir J. van der Laan: Merge pull request #7128...
386 2015-12-02T13:39:06  <GitHub83> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7128: Constrain rpcport default values to a single location in code (master...const_rpcport) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7128
387 2015-12-02T14:00:31  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
388 2015-12-02T14:06:26  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
389 2015-12-02T14:19:17  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
390 2015-12-02T14:23:56  *** molly has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
391 2015-12-02T14:26:23  *** moli has quit IRC
392 2015-12-02T14:31:31  *** guest234234 has quit IRC
393 2015-12-02T14:39:15  <MarcoFalke> wumpus, translation missing for $ grep -r "Choose data directory on startup (default: %u" src/
394 2015-12-02T14:39:16  <MarcoFalke> ?
395 2015-12-02T14:41:20  <MarcoFalke> Can't find it in bitcoin/master nor transifex
396 2015-12-02T14:42:12  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
397 2015-12-02T14:46:32  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
398 2015-12-02T14:47:51  *** mr_burdell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
399 2015-12-02T14:51:37  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: oh shit
400 2015-12-02T14:52:13  <wumpus> MarcoFalke: when moving the option translations to qt, it was forgotten to change _ to tr()
401 2015-12-02T14:52:22  <wumpus> now all those translations are lost
402 2015-12-02T14:53:03  <MarcoFalke> trasifex saves them?
403 2015-12-02T14:53:27  <wumpus> it removes them once they're out of the english (reference) translation
404 2015-12-02T14:53:29  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
405 2015-12-02T14:53:52  *** calibre720 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
406 2015-12-02T14:56:07  <wumpus> they are still in old git but getting them back in transifex is not trivial
407 2015-12-02T15:00:42  <GitHub115> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #7158: [qt] Use tr() instead of _() (master...MarcoFalke-2015-translations) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7158
408 2015-12-02T15:01:28  <MarcoFalke> Trasifex should have them in "Suggestions" from .11?
409 2015-12-02T15:03:51  <wumpus> possibly
410 2015-12-02T15:05:10  <MarcoFalke> But still it's unclear how to get them back into .12 for all langs.
411 2015-12-02T15:06:26  <wumpus> it's likely possible through the API
412 2015-12-02T15:06:59  <jonasschnelli> what's the difference between tr() and _()?
413 2015-12-02T15:07:11  <wumpus> _() is GNU gettext, tr() is Qt
414 2015-12-02T15:07:24  <wumpus> we emulate _() for some files, but it does nothing in qt code
415 2015-12-02T15:07:58  <jonasschnelli> Okay. I see.
416 2015-12-02T15:09:33  <wumpus> i don't blame MarcoFalke though, I blame the person that moved those options to init.cpp in the first place :p
417 2015-12-02T15:09:45  <wumpus> they used to be in the gui code, should never have happened
418 2015-12-02T15:10:24  <MarcoFalke> Force pushed. https://travis-ci.org/bitcoin/bitcoin/builds/94414954 can be canceled again
419 2015-12-02T15:10:55  <wumpus> done
420 2015-12-02T15:28:20  *** PaulCape_ has quit IRC
421 2015-12-02T15:28:31  <GitHub114> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 8 new commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/df2ced5c8325...aeedd8a53b2d
422 2015-12-02T15:28:32  <GitHub114> bitcoin/master 8a03727 paveljanik: Fix various typos
423 2015-12-02T15:28:33  <GitHub114> bitcoin/master e69bad1 MarcoFalke: [trivial] Fix typo in peertablemodel.cpp
424 2015-12-02T15:28:33  <GitHub114> bitcoin/master 74f7341 antonio-fr: Update miner.cpp: Fix typo in comment
425 2015-12-02T15:28:42  *** ParadoxSpiral has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
426 2015-12-02T15:28:42  <GitHub115> [bitcoin] laanwj closed pull request #7157: Fix typos and misc cleanup. (master...MarcoFalke-2015-trivial6) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/7157
427 2015-12-02T15:29:47  *** PaulCapestany has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
428 2015-12-02T15:30:06  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
429 2015-12-02T15:34:55  *** tripleslash has quit IRC
430 2015-12-02T15:34:55  *** CodeShark_ has quit IRC
431 2015-12-02T15:34:55  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
432 2015-12-02T15:34:56  *** bsm117532 has quit IRC
433 2015-12-02T15:34:56  *** arubi_ has quit IRC
434 2015-12-02T15:34:56  *** instagibbs has quit IRC
435 2015-12-02T15:34:56  *** lecusemble has quit IRC
436 2015-12-02T15:34:56  *** pmienk has quit IRC
437 2015-12-02T15:34:56  *** da2ce7 has quit IRC
438 2015-12-02T15:34:56  *** ghtdak has quit IRC
439 2015-12-02T15:34:57  *** mr_burdell has quit IRC
440 2015-12-02T15:34:57  *** go1111111 has quit IRC
441 2015-12-02T15:34:57  *** warren has quit IRC
442 2015-12-02T15:34:57  *** asoltys has quit IRC
443 2015-12-02T15:34:58  *** phantomcircuit has quit IRC
444 2015-12-02T15:34:58  *** cfields has quit IRC
445 2015-12-02T15:34:58  *** Apocalyptic has quit IRC
446 2015-12-02T15:34:58  *** gavinandresen has quit IRC
447 2015-12-02T15:34:58  *** BlueMatt has quit IRC
448 2015-12-02T15:34:58  *** jtimon has quit IRC
449 2015-12-02T15:34:58  *** rubensayshi has quit IRC
450 2015-12-02T15:34:59  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
451 2015-12-02T15:34:59  *** amiller has quit IRC
452 2015-12-02T15:34:59  *** fkhan has quit IRC
453 2015-12-02T15:34:59  *** jgarzik has quit IRC
454 2015-12-02T15:34:59  *** arowser has quit IRC
455 2015-12-02T15:35:00  *** berndj has quit IRC
456 2015-12-02T15:35:01  *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
457 2015-12-02T15:35:01  *** jcorgan has quit IRC
458 2015-12-02T15:35:02  *** gribble has quit IRC
459 2015-12-02T15:35:02  *** isis has quit IRC
460 2015-12-02T15:35:02  *** Luke-Jr has quit IRC
461 2015-12-02T15:35:02  *** kanzure has quit IRC
462 2015-12-02T15:35:02  *** Eliel has quit IRC
463 2015-12-02T15:35:02  *** davec has quit IRC
464 2015-12-02T15:35:02  *** BananaLotus has quit IRC
465 2015-12-02T15:35:03  *** Guest1234 has quit IRC
466 2015-12-02T15:35:05  *** Anduck has quit IRC
467 2015-12-02T15:35:05  *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
468 2015-12-02T15:35:05  *** sdaftuar has quit IRC
469 2015-12-02T15:35:05  *** morcos has quit IRC
470 2015-12-02T15:35:05  *** Thireus has quit IRC
471 2015-12-02T15:35:06  *** baldur has quit IRC
472 2015-12-02T15:35:06  *** Squidicuz has quit IRC
473 2015-12-02T15:35:06  *** AtashiCon has quit IRC
474 2015-12-02T15:35:06  *** therealnanotube has quit IRC
475 2015-12-02T15:35:06  *** harding has quit IRC
476 2015-12-02T15:35:07  *** Arnavion has quit IRC
477 2015-12-02T15:35:07  *** Taek has quit IRC
478 2015-12-02T15:35:08  *** btcdrak has quit IRC
479 2015-12-02T15:35:08  *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
480 2015-12-02T15:35:08  *** lclc_ has quit IRC
481 2015-12-02T15:35:08  *** CodeShark has quit IRC
482 2015-12-02T15:35:09  *** evoskuil has quit IRC
483 2015-12-02T15:35:09  *** blkdb has quit IRC
484 2015-12-02T15:35:09  *** midnightmagic has quit IRC
485 2015-12-02T15:35:09  *** sipa has quit IRC
486 2015-12-02T15:35:10  *** zmanian_ has quit IRC
487 2015-12-02T15:35:11  *** calibre720 has quit IRC
488 2015-12-02T15:35:11  *** paveljanik has quit IRC
489 2015-12-02T15:35:11  *** [b__b] has quit IRC
490 2015-12-02T15:35:12  *** pigeons has quit IRC
491 2015-12-02T15:35:13  *** petertodd has quit IRC
492 2015-12-02T15:35:13  *** wumpus has quit IRC
493 2015-12-02T15:35:13  *** jouke has quit IRC
494 2015-12-02T15:35:13  *** jl2012 has quit IRC
495 2015-12-02T15:35:14  *** andytoshi has quit IRC
496 2015-12-02T15:35:14  *** neha has quit IRC
497 2015-12-02T15:35:14  *** mm_1 has quit IRC
498 2015-12-02T15:35:14  *** aj has quit IRC
499 2015-12-02T15:35:14  *** bsm1175322 has quit IRC
500 2015-12-02T15:35:16  *** PRab has quit IRC
501 2015-12-02T15:35:16  *** helo has quit IRC
502 2015-12-02T15:35:17  *** guruvan has quit IRC
503 2015-12-02T15:35:17  *** zxzzt has quit IRC
504 2015-12-02T15:35:17  *** murr4y has quit IRC
505 2015-12-02T15:35:18  *** nkuttler has quit IRC
506 2015-12-02T15:35:20  *** Guest40360 has quit IRC
507 2015-12-02T15:37:21  *** Guest1234 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
508 2015-12-02T15:39:28  *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
509 2015-12-02T15:39:31  *** mr_burdell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
510 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** tripleslash has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
511 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** CodeShark_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
513 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** bsm117532 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
514 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** arubi_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
515 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
516 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** lecusemble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
517 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** pmienk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
518 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** da2ce7 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
519 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
520 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** go1111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
521 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** warren has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** asoltys has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
523 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** phantomcircuit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
524 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** cfields has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
525 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** Apocalyptic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
526 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** gavinandresen has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
527 2015-12-02T15:39:32  *** BlueMatt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
528 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** AtashiCon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
529 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** therealnanotube has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
530 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** harding has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
531 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** Arnavion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
532 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** Taek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
533 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
534 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** lclc_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
535 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** CodeShark has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
536 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** evoskuil has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
537 2015-12-02T15:39:35  *** blkdb has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
538 2015-12-02T15:40:52  *** PRab has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
539 2015-12-02T15:40:52  *** helo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
540 2015-12-02T15:40:52  *** zxzzt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
541 2015-12-02T15:40:52  *** murr4y has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542 2015-12-02T15:40:52  *** nkuttler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
543 2015-12-02T15:42:35  *** Anduck has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
544 2015-12-02T15:42:35  *** dgenr8 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
545 2015-12-02T15:42:35  *** sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
546 2015-12-02T15:42:35  *** morcos has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
547 2015-12-02T15:42:35  *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
548 2015-12-02T15:42:35  *** baldur has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
549 2015-12-02T15:42:35  *** Squidicuz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
550 2015-12-02T15:42:56  *** midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
551 2015-12-02T15:42:57  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
552 2015-12-02T15:42:57  *** zmanian_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
553 2015-12-02T15:44:18  *** ParadoxSpiral has quit IRC
554 2015-12-02T15:44:20  *** Guest40360 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
555 2015-12-02T15:45:45  *** CodeShark_ has quit IRC
556 2015-12-02T15:47:37  *** ParadoxSpiral has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
557 2015-12-02T15:58:38  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
558 2015-12-02T15:58:54  <morcos> wumpus: turns out due to the GetMinRelayFee function, the default block priority size change completely eliminated the ability to send free txs (at least it looks like it would have)
559 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
560 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
561 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** amiller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** fkhan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
563 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** jgarzik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
564 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
565 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
566 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
567 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** isis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
568 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** kanzure has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
569 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** Eliel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
570 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
571 2015-12-02T15:59:17  *** BananaLotus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572 2015-12-02T15:59:25  <morcos> this will also be addressed in 7062 by just eliminating the GetMinRelayFee function altogether
573 2015-12-02T15:59:51  <morcos> i'm not sure how much it matters since sending free txs is basically useless anyway
574 2015-12-02T16:00:01  <morcos> if you're running with a limited mempool
575 2015-12-02T16:00:09  <morcos> s/useless/unusable/
576 2015-12-02T16:01:16  <morcos> just pointing this out to understand that master has slightly unintended behavior right now and another reason 7062 is important
577 2015-12-02T16:01:25  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
578 2015-12-02T16:01:50  <morcos> of course this wasn't caught in rpc tests because we changed them all to have a default block priority size
579 2015-12-02T16:03:03  <morcos> i'd view this as further evidence that in order to get away from our unstable equilibrium with respect to priority in 0.12, we should just remove it completely for 0.13
580 2015-12-02T16:03:25  <morcos> its too hard to properly support at least in its current form
581 2015-12-02T16:07:36  *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
582 2015-12-02T16:09:03  *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
583 2015-12-02T16:09:31  *** jtimon has quit IRC
584 2015-12-02T16:09:32  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
585 2015-12-02T16:09:32  *** amiller has quit IRC
586 2015-12-02T16:09:32  *** fkhan has quit IRC
587 2015-12-02T16:09:32  *** jgarzik has quit IRC
588 2015-12-02T16:09:32  *** arowser has quit IRC
589 2015-12-02T16:09:34  *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
590 2015-12-02T16:09:34  *** jcorgan has quit IRC
591 2015-12-02T16:09:34  *** isis has quit IRC
592 2015-12-02T16:09:34  *** kanzure has quit IRC
593 2015-12-02T16:09:34  *** Eliel has quit IRC
594 2015-12-02T16:09:35  *** davec has quit IRC
595 2015-12-02T16:09:35  *** BananaLotus has quit IRC
596 2015-12-02T16:10:22  *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
597 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** bsm1175322 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
598 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** aj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
599 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** neha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
600 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
601 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
602 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** petertodd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
603 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
604 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** pigeons has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
605 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** [b__b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
606 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** calibre720 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
607 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** mm_1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
608 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
609 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** berndj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
610 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
611 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
612 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** amiller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
613 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** fkhan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
614 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** jgarzik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
615 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
616 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
617 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
618 2015-12-02T16:34:51  *** isis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
619 2015-12-02T16:34:52  *** kanzure has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
620 2015-12-02T16:34:52  *** Eliel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
621 2015-12-02T16:34:52  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622 2015-12-02T16:34:52  *** BananaLotus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
623 2015-12-02T16:45:01  *** jtimon has quit IRC
624 2015-12-02T16:45:02  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
625 2015-12-02T16:45:02  *** amiller has quit IRC
626 2015-12-02T16:45:02  *** fkhan has quit IRC
627 2015-12-02T16:45:02  *** jgarzik has quit IRC
628 2015-12-02T16:45:03  *** arowser has quit IRC
629 2015-12-02T16:45:04  *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
630 2015-12-02T16:45:04  *** jcorgan has quit IRC
631 2015-12-02T16:45:04  *** isis has quit IRC
632 2015-12-02T16:45:04  *** kanzure has quit IRC
633 2015-12-02T16:45:05  *** Eliel has quit IRC
634 2015-12-02T16:45:05  *** davec has quit IRC
635 2015-12-02T16:45:05  *** BananaLotus has quit IRC
636 2015-12-02T16:45:06  *** berndj has quit IRC
637 2015-12-02T16:45:06  *** jl2012 has quit IRC
638 2015-12-02T16:45:06  *** mm_1 has quit IRC
639 2015-12-02T16:45:06  *** calibre720 has quit IRC
640 2015-12-02T16:45:07  *** [b__b] has quit IRC
641 2015-12-02T16:45:08  *** pigeons has quit IRC
642 2015-12-02T16:45:08  *** petertodd has quit IRC
643 2015-12-02T16:45:08  *** wumpus has quit IRC
644 2015-12-02T16:45:08  *** jouke has quit IRC
645 2015-12-02T16:45:09  *** andytoshi has quit IRC
646 2015-12-02T16:45:09  *** neha has quit IRC
647 2015-12-02T16:45:10  *** aj has quit IRC
648 2015-12-02T16:45:10  *** bsm1175322 has quit IRC
649 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** BananaLotus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
650 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** davec has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
651 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** Eliel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** kanzure has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
653 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** isis has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
654 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** jcorgan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
655 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
656 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** arowser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
657 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** jgarzik has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
658 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** fkhan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
659 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** amiller has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
660 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
661 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** berndj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
663 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** jl2012 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
664 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** mm_1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
665 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** calibre720 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
666 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** [b__b] has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
667 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** pigeons has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
668 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** jouke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
669 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** petertodd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
670 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** wumpus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
671 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** andytoshi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
672 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** neha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
673 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** aj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
674 2015-12-02T16:46:42  *** bsm1175322 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
675 2015-12-02T16:48:52  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
676 2015-12-02T16:48:52  *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
677 2015-12-02T16:53:05  *** Eliel has quit IRC
678 2015-12-02T17:01:58  *** Eliel has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
679 2015-12-02T17:05:22  *** Luke-Jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
680 2015-12-02T17:05:42  *** ParadoxSpiral is now known as Guest43675
681 2015-12-02T17:06:16  *** guruvan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
682 2015-12-02T17:08:41  *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
683 2015-12-02T17:21:02  *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
684 2015-12-02T17:21:03  *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
685 2015-12-02T17:21:35  *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
686 2015-12-02T17:21:35  *** Amnez777 has quit IRC
687 2015-12-02T17:21:35  *** Amnez777 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
688 2015-12-02T17:26:40  *** BashCo has quit IRC
689 2015-12-02T17:44:52  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
690 2015-12-02T17:46:39  *** ParadoxSpiral_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
691 2015-12-02T17:49:50  *** Guest43675 has quit IRC
692 2015-12-02T17:54:39  *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
693 2015-12-02T18:32:54  <btcdrak> wow, today has been a bullrun on PR merges!
694 2015-12-02T18:33:08  <sipa> almost there
695 2015-12-02T18:54:42  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
696 2015-12-02T18:56:48  *** afk11 has quit IRC
697 2015-12-02T18:58:42  <btcdrak> sdaftaur: #6312 has been rebased,
698 2015-12-02T18:59:13  *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
699 2015-12-02T19:00:33  <morcos> sipa: i have some questions about #6312
700 2015-12-02T19:00:50  <morcos> in thinking about how to store height and time txs are valid at
701 2015-12-02T19:01:13  <morcos> are we going to be ok with passing output height/time arguments through CheckLockTime to LockTime to get populated?
702 2015-12-02T19:01:29  <morcos> The int64_t that LockTime returns is useless as far as I can tell, it should just be a bool
703 2015-12-02T19:02:22  <phantomcircuit> morcos, there are way too many knobs for that stuff
704 2015-12-02T19:02:38  <morcos> phantomcircuit: how do you mean?
705 2015-12-02T19:02:39  <sipa> hmm, i thought it was used for determining time until confirmation
706 2015-12-02T19:02:50  <phantomcircuit> i was going through and trying to change mining knobs yesterday and had to go and read the source to make sense of them
707 2015-12-02T19:03:28  <sipa> but the semantics are a bit weird; you need to call twice, once with zero time and once with zero height to get actual data
708 2015-12-02T19:03:31  <morcos> sipa: i didn't double check that it wasn't used anywhere but how could it be.  you have a height and which you could be valid and a time, its only returning one
709 2015-12-02T19:04:18  <morcos> phantomcircuit: i'm not talking about knobs, i'm talking about caching calculations to save time on reorgs and mining
710 2015-12-02T19:04:20  <sipa> if that is not the case, reverting to just a bool seems appropriate
711 2015-12-02T19:04:25  <morcos> which knobs were you turning
712 2015-12-02T19:04:40  <phantomcircuit> ok im talking about what you said like 3 hours ago :)
713 2015-12-02T19:04:41  <morcos> sipa: that's secondary to my question though of is it ok to pass in output arguments?
714 2015-12-02T19:04:48  <phantomcircuit> the priority space things
715 2015-12-02T19:05:02  <morcos> phantomcircuit: ok, agreed there
716 2015-12-02T19:05:15  *** treehug88 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
717 2015-12-02T19:05:20  <sipa> morcos: will look at the code in a few days, other things now first
718 2015-12-02T19:05:40  <morcos> sipa: we don't need to change that for #6312 to merge, but i just want to have some idea that we'll be able to solve the performance degradation
719 2015-12-02T19:05:58  <morcos> since i think solving it should hold up releasing #6312 based code in a point release
720 2015-12-02T19:06:04  *** cocoBTC has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
721 2015-12-02T19:06:13  <morcos> sipa: ok sure
722 2015-12-02T19:06:33  <morcos> releasing BIP68 soft fork i mean
723 2015-12-02T19:07:45  <morcos> phantomcircuit: checkout sdaftuars 4th commit in 7062. it just makes me happy!
724 2015-12-02T19:08:42  *** afk11 has quit IRC
725 2015-12-02T19:11:28  <morcos> sigh.. i guess the return value of LockTime is used for GUI and tests.. doesn't seem very valuable to me though since it's just one of the possible times you could be waiting for
726 2015-12-02T19:11:54  <sipa> maybe it should return a pair instead
727 2015-12-02T19:12:00  <sipa> with height and time both
728 2015-12-02T19:17:57  <morcos> yeah, thats' what i'd like to get out of it, except only the BIP68 valid height and time
729 2015-12-02T19:18:06  <morcos> we already have the locktime handy
730 2015-12-02T19:33:31  *** Thireus has quit IRC
731 2015-12-02T19:54:01  *** Ylbam has quit IRC
732 2015-12-02T19:54:28  <morcos> i hope this isn't a really stupid question, but the code in the GUI that shows how long a locked transaciton is "open" for
733 2015-12-02T19:54:45  <morcos> how does one get a locked transacion in the wallet in the first place?
734 2015-12-02T19:55:13  <MarcoFalke> reindex
735 2015-12-02T19:56:08  <morcos> so it'll be temporarily locked while the chain catches up?
736 2015-12-02T19:57:58  <MarcoFalke> Can't test anymore :(
737 2015-12-02T19:57:59  <MarcoFalke> $ src/qt/bitcoin-qt -regtest -reindex
738 2015-12-02T19:57:59  <MarcoFalke> bitcoin-qt: wallet/wallet.cpp:776: void CWallet::MarkConflicted(const uint256&, const uint256&): Assertion `mapBlockIndex.count(hashBlock)' failed.
739 2015-12-02T19:57:59  <MarcoFalke> Aborted (core dumped)
740 2015-12-02T19:59:13  <morcos> MarcoFalke: Not sure if your talking to me?  but that seems like a larger problem than having no real way to show a locked tx!
741 2015-12-02T20:01:48  <MarcoFalke> morcos, reindex was for you. The other was for me. ;)
742 2015-12-02T20:02:00  <MarcoFalke> Just a note for me test this tomorrow.
743 2015-12-02T20:02:06  <MarcoFalke> Don't have time right now
744 2015-12-02T20:07:41  *** MarcoFalke has quit IRC
745 2015-12-02T20:09:05  *** lclc_ is now known as lclc
746 2015-12-02T20:34:28  *** guest234234 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
747 2015-12-02T20:38:43  *** Luke-Jr has quit IRC
748 2015-12-02T20:39:04  *** Luke-Jr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
749 2015-12-02T20:59:47  *** guest234234 has quit IRC
750 2015-12-02T21:08:05  *** Thireus has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
751 2015-12-02T21:38:37  *** go1111111 has quit IRC
752 2015-12-02T21:53:55  *** ParadoxSpiral_ has quit IRC
753 2015-12-02T21:53:58  *** treehug88 has quit IRC
754 2015-12-02T22:05:02  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
755 2015-12-02T22:06:00  *** arubi_ is now known as arubi
756 2015-12-02T22:22:35  *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
757 2015-12-02T22:35:35  *** fkhan has quit IRC
758 2015-12-02T22:36:38  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
759 2015-12-02T22:42:37  *** zookolaptop has quit IRC
760 2015-12-02T22:49:49  *** cocoBTC has quit IRC
761 2015-12-02T22:50:10  *** fkhan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
762 2015-12-02T23:07:42  *** zookolaptop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
763 2015-12-02T23:47:00  *** go1111111 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev