12019-05-07T00:00:02  *** Avelino has quit IRC
  22019-05-07T00:02:52  *** fanquake has quit IRC
  32019-05-07T00:07:02  *** rlaager1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  42019-05-07T00:10:05  *** sipa has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  52019-05-07T00:15:52  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
  62019-05-07T00:19:44  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
  72019-05-07T00:19:44  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] grim-trigger opened pull request #15968: Fix portability issue with pthreads (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15968
  82019-05-07T00:19:45  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
  92019-05-07T00:30:51  *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
 102019-05-07T00:31:49  *** IGHOR has quit IRC
 112019-05-07T00:34:44  *** IGHOR has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 122019-05-07T00:37:17  *** YamatoSueoka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 132019-05-07T00:38:35  *** YamatoSueoka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 142019-05-07T00:40:35  *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 152019-05-07T00:48:57  *** goatpig has quit IRC
 162019-05-07T01:00:14  *** Dean_Guss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 172019-05-07T01:00:32  *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
 182019-05-07T01:02:14  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
 192019-05-07T01:06:29  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 202019-05-07T01:06:29  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] JeremyRubin opened pull request #15969: Refactor: explicit VerifyScript control flow based on pattern matching (master...explicit-verifyscript) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15969
 212019-05-07T01:06:30  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
 222019-05-07T01:10:08  *** tryphe has quit IRC
 232019-05-07T01:11:54  *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 242019-05-07T01:31:28  *** YamatoSueoka has quit IRC
 252019-05-07T01:32:08  *** YamatoSueoka has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 262019-05-07T01:40:31  *** roconnor has quit IRC
 272019-05-07T01:40:47  *** belcher has quit IRC
 282019-05-07T01:42:44  *** Dean_Guss has quit IRC
 292019-05-07T01:59:57  *** grubles has quit IRC
 302019-05-07T02:08:37  *** ccdle12 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 312019-05-07T02:21:50  *** scoop has quit IRC
 322019-05-07T02:44:33  <gmaxwell> test/sanitizer_suppressions/ubsan  contains suppressions of what appears to be actual undefined behavior, which I can't find any discussions of anywhere.
 332019-05-07T02:44:54  <gmaxwell> alignment:move.h
 342019-05-07T02:44:55  <gmaxwell> alignment:prevector.h
 352019-05-07T02:45:05  <gmaxwell> vptr:fs.cpp
 362019-05-07T02:45:08  <gmaxwell> in particular
 372019-05-07T02:50:34  <gmaxwell> Git blame says they were added by https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14252 but there isn't any discussion of them there.
 382019-05-07T03:00:01  *** rlaager1 has quit IRC
 392019-05-07T03:01:08  *** ccdle12 has quit IRC
 402019-05-07T03:04:57  *** YamatoSueoka has quit IRC
 412019-05-07T03:50:04  *** dviola has quit IRC
 422019-05-07T03:51:40  *** mryandao has quit IRC
 432019-05-07T03:52:35  *** dviola has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 442019-05-07T03:53:58  *** mryandao has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 452019-05-07T04:16:25  *** skyikot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 462019-05-07T04:20:26  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
 472019-05-07T04:24:56  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 482019-05-07T04:28:38  *** jtimon has quit IRC
 492019-05-07T04:38:31  *** sdaftuar has quit IRC
 502019-05-07T04:39:00  *** sdaftuar has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 512019-05-07T04:47:55  *** kljasdfvv has quit IRC
 522019-05-07T04:48:18  *** kljasdfvv has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 532019-05-07T05:00:33  *** spinza has quit IRC
 542019-05-07T05:06:10  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
 552019-05-07T05:06:38  *** skyikot has quit IRC
 562019-05-07T05:07:40  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
 572019-05-07T05:11:52  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 582019-05-07T05:22:45  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 592019-05-07T05:25:58  *** Dean_Guss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 602019-05-07T05:42:17  <jeremyrubin> sipa: why does taproot need a new witness version if the WITNESS_V1_TAPROOT_SIZE != WITNESS_V0_SCRIPTHASH_SIZE?
 612019-05-07T05:42:41  *** aqu4 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 622019-05-07T05:43:38  <sipa> jeremyrubin: because of a stupid mistake in bip141 that makes v0 segwit with program sizes other than 20 or 32 invalid
 632019-05-07T05:44:04  <jeremyrubin> got it
 642019-05-07T05:44:14  <gmaxwell> to be fair, I believe it was an intentional decision, jut a bad one. :P
 652019-05-07T05:45:07  <jeremyrubin> Also this is kinda stupid, but the SIGTYPE::ECDSA/SIGTYPE::SCHNORR can be a template parameter because we never (in the code I've reviewed) use it without knowing it's type as a literal
 662019-05-07T05:46:04  <sipa> jeremyrubin: sure, but premature optimization :)
 672019-05-07T05:46:22  <gmaxwell> probably doesn't change the output code.
 682019-05-07T05:46:39  <sipa> it likely does (there's some indirection)
 692019-05-07T05:47:11  <jeremyrubin> Ah not so much as an optimization, but as better code (IMO) safety because someone never does something silly with dynamically figuring out what kind of signature you are passing in
 702019-05-07T05:47:34  <sipa> it makes the code harder to review too
 712019-05-07T05:48:39  <jeremyrubin> only a little -- I think it's easier because I spent some time looking to see how we were determining what type signature to pass in -- fortunately at present it's literals
 722019-05-07T05:48:40  <sipa> but i agree it would make some classes of bugs harder
 732019-05-07T05:50:23  <jeremyrubin> yeah it's not something that like *has* to change, just thought it was worth pointing out that the SignatureType argument looked a little smelly to me
 742019-05-07T05:50:54  <jeremyrubin> compiler errors > assert(false)
 752019-05-07T05:52:20  <jeremyrubin> sipa: BTW; could you open a Pull Request on your local repo
 762019-05-07T05:52:33  <jeremyrubin> sipa: that way can add review comments/notes
 772019-05-07T05:53:49  <sipa> yes, you can?
 782019-05-07T05:55:04  <jeremyrubin> I mean github fork. I don't think I can open one on your fork
 792019-05-07T05:55:18  <sipa> sure you can
 802019-05-07T05:55:57  <sipa> there are a number of prs against my repo
 812019-05-07T05:56:30  <jeremyrubin> can you update your master it's out of date
 822019-05-07T05:56:37  <jeremyrubin> (figured out how to do it)
 832019-05-07T05:57:01  <sipa> u
 842019-05-07T05:57:19  <sipa> you shouldn't care about my master
 852019-05-07T05:57:57  *** Skirmant has quit IRC
 862019-05-07T05:58:03  <sipa> also, this isn't really the time to go perfect the code yet
 872019-05-07T05:58:06  <jeremyrubin> Well I'm opening the PR of your taproot against your master -- if I open it against bitcoin/master it will show up in core's PR?
 882019-05-07T05:58:33  <sipa> you can choose both the base repo and branch
 892019-05-07T05:58:35  <jeremyrubin> Yeah I just want to review to understand the trade offs better for looking at the specs
 902019-05-07T05:58:45  <gmaxwell> sipa: you should blow it away, like my secp256k1 https://github.com/gmaxwell/secp256k1/  (incidentally yours has come back, IIRC you'd done the same bfore)
 912019-05-07T06:00:02  *** aqu4 has quit IRC
 922019-05-07T06:00:29  <jeremyrubin> sipa: maybe I'm missing something but when I open a PR on your fork, it has to be against one of your branches.
 932019-05-07T06:00:42  <jeremyrubin> https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/compare/master...sipa:taproot
 942019-05-07T06:02:21  <sipa> well, then you're doing it wrong :)
 952019-05-07T06:03:12  <jeremyrubin> ugh...
 962019-05-07T06:03:28  <jeremyrubin> why isn't there a CLI for this
 972019-05-07T06:04:01  <kallewoof> sipa: stupid question, but where is the epoch stored? It is used in the SHA256 for the transaction digest, but is it just assumed to be 0 for now?
 982019-05-07T06:04:38  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
 992019-05-07T06:05:02  <sipa> kallewoof: it is not stored. it's defined to be 0
1002019-05-07T06:05:03  <gmaxwell> kallewoof: it isn't, it's implicit.
1012019-05-07T06:05:14  <jeremyrubin> I have absolutely no clue how to do this.
1022019-05-07T06:05:22  <gmaxwell> later a new checksig operation or something might be added that defines it to be 1
1032019-05-07T06:05:34  <sipa> something somewhere sometime someplace may use the same hashing algorithm with another epoch value
1042019-05-07T06:05:39  <sipa> it's likely never needed
1052019-05-07T06:05:49  * jeremyrubin bangs head on keyboard
1062019-05-07T06:05:52  <kallewoof> okay. so once we introduce epoch 1 and there may be ambiguity, we start storing it..?
1072019-05-07T06:06:13  <sipa> no
1082019-05-07T06:06:24  <kallewoof> gmaxwell: oh i see. that makes sense, thanks.
1092019-05-07T06:06:29  <sipa> it's just part of the hashing algorithm
1102019-05-07T06:08:22  <kallewoof> the purpose of the epoch is to avoid users being able to spend an output using a different operation that happens to use the same signature and "content" (content being the sighash sans the epoch)
1112019-05-07T06:08:41  <kallewoof> IIUC
1122019-05-07T06:08:50  <gmaxwell> right
1132019-05-07T06:08:55  <gmaxwell> like in some v2 script it might be defined to be 1, which will prevent you from rebinding a signature from a v2 pubkey to v1... but in no case would it need to be signaled
1142019-05-07T06:09:28  <kallewoof> got it!
1152019-05-07T06:10:15  *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162019-05-07T06:10:53  <jeremyrubin> is 1 byte kinda small?
1172019-05-07T06:11:05  <sipa> 1 byte is infinite
1182019-05-07T06:11:19  <sipa> :)
1192019-05-07T06:11:25  <jeremyrubin> we can extend it if we hit 255?
1202019-05-07T06:11:29  <sipa> yes
1212019-05-07T06:11:31  <gmaxwell> one bit would be sufficient, but would complicate alignment.
1222019-05-07T06:12:17  <sipa> all we need is making sure no preimage ever collides
1232019-05-07T06:12:18  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
1242019-05-07T06:12:58  <sipa> if the existing extension mechanisms are insufficients, we can always switch to a different tag in the hash or so
1252019-05-07T06:13:30  <jeremyrubin> In the future how do we infer the epoch? Like from tx version or something?
1262019-05-07T06:13:39  <jeremyrubin> I guess it doesn't matter that much...
1272019-05-07T06:14:27  <jeremyrubin> Just trying to determine the benefit of doing this approach v.s. having a pre-salted SHA256
1282019-05-07T06:14:32  <sipa> jeez peoe
1292019-05-07T06:14:48  <sipa> if the byte wasn't there nobody would even talking about these issues
1302019-05-07T06:14:57  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1312019-05-07T06:14:59  <sipa> it's just a mechanism for future extension, like so many others
1322019-05-07T06:15:10  <sipa> none of this is critical
1332019-05-07T06:15:11  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1342019-05-07T06:15:35  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1352019-05-07T06:15:35  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] orientye opened pull request #15970: fix static_assert for macro HAVE_THREAD_LOCAL (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15970
1362019-05-07T06:15:45  <jeremyrubin> Hah, not trying to give u an aneurism
1372019-05-07T06:15:48  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1382019-05-07T06:15:49  <gmaxwell> it may never be used for anything, but its important to use unaliasable hashes.
1392019-05-07T06:16:19  <sipa> jeremyrubin: sorry, don't worry :)
1402019-05-07T06:16:42  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
1412019-05-07T06:17:47  <jeremyrubin> Sure, I get the purpose and the issue with rebinding a signature -- and I was only looking at it because kalle brought it up
1422019-05-07T06:17:52  * jeremyrubin kicks kalle
1432019-05-07T06:17:58  <jeremyrubin> ;)
1442019-05-07T06:18:32  <wumpus> new proposal for 0.19.0 release schedule (looks like I included two months too much) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15940#issuecomment-489921644
1452019-05-07T06:19:39  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
1462019-05-07T06:19:46  *** promag has quit IRC
1472019-05-07T06:20:05  <wumpus> gmaxwell: no, there was no discussion of specific surpressions as far as I know, this was for adding a travis run to catch new UBsan problems, so all the current ones had to be surpressed for that to not fail every single time :)
1482019-05-07T06:20:25  <sipa> wumpus: not releasing right after new year is probably good
1492019-05-07T06:22:19  <wumpus> sipa: so that's a vote for moving it, I guess?
1502019-05-07T06:23:43  <wumpus> I'm just asking to be sure that having two months less than initially expected doesn't ruin anyone's plans
1512019-05-07T06:30:29  <wumpus> "not doing a release on new year" is a good point, although it's quite a nice release date :-)
1522019-05-07T06:30:45  <jeremyrubin> Bitcoin 2020!
1532019-05-07T06:30:50  <wumpus> yess
1542019-05-07T06:31:13  <jeremyrubin> Actually Bitcoin Satoshi's 2020 Visison
1552019-05-07T06:31:28  <jeremyrubin> '__'
1562019-05-07T06:31:38  <jonasschnelli> Provable correct ChaCha20-Poly1305 implementation (vectorised assembly): https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.04606
1572019-05-07T06:32:07  <jonasschnelli> https://github.com/tfaoliveira/libjc
1582019-05-07T06:32:30  <gmaxwell> "We illustrate ur approach"  written by lolcats?
1592019-05-07T06:33:19  <jonasschnelli> heh
1602019-05-07T06:37:17  <wumpus> interesting approach
1612019-05-07T06:37:20  <jeremyrubin> sipa: the annex is a bit unclear to me -- my understanding is that it's a space to provide an extra data argument? But what stops this from being malleated? It's covered by the signature? Is one annex certainly enough? What if I want 2
1622019-05-07T06:37:30  *** Guest44098 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1632019-05-07T06:37:33  <jeremyrubin> Sorry if those are bad questions
1642019-05-07T06:38:35  <wumpus> at least it avoids the 'assebmly language is hard to review' problem by the code being provable correct at every manipulation step
1652019-05-07T06:38:41  <jeremyrubin> I think what I would expect is that when I open a taproot i climb back through the witness data up to the 0xc0 leaf
1662019-05-07T06:40:41  <gmaxwell> jeremyrubin: the annex is signed.
1672019-05-07T06:41:56  <jeremyrubin> Ok -- I think I'd rather the spec say 'covered by the wtxid' rather than 'transaction digest' (less ambiguous by a smidge)
1682019-05-07T06:42:07  <jeremyrubin> If a particular tap branch doesn'
1692019-05-07T06:42:38  <jeremyrubin> * doesn't require a signature, then the annex is malleable (doesn't affect txid so no big deal I guess)
1702019-05-07T06:43:14  <gmaxwell> if an output can be spent without a signature it's going to be malleable in many ways, including txid impacting ones. :)
1712019-05-07T06:44:03  <jeremyrubin> That's kind of true -- could imagine a world where it's not true
1722019-05-07T06:44:34  <jeremyrubin> imagine opcode 'CHECK_INPUT_ALSO_SPENT_VERIFY'
1732019-05-07T06:44:50  <gmaxwell> regardless, the annex is protected from malleation in the same way anything else is (and more so than many things are)
1742019-05-07T06:47:30  <jeremyrubin> Fair -- might be good to introduce a OP_NO_ANNEX or something at some point if annexes are doing anything... interesting.
1752019-05-07T06:47:55  <jeremyrubin> is there anywhere the annex has been discussed more in detail on what it might be used for?
1762019-05-07T06:48:33  <gmaxwell> the main purpose of the annex is to be able to adjust transaction weight prior to looking up inputs.
1772019-05-07T06:48:43  *** mryandao has quit IRC
1782019-05-07T06:49:15  <gmaxwell> (well to be clear, its a generic signed data extension... but the construction is specifically motivated so it can work inputlessly)
1792019-05-07T06:50:01  <jeremyrubin> Can you calrify that a little bit for me? {inputlessly, adjust transaction weight}
1802019-05-07T06:51:28  <gmaxwell> opcodes which are very expensive to verify would increase the transaction's weight, but its important that we can check the effective weight of a transaction before doing the work of verifying it (in particular, looking up the inputs).
1812019-05-07T06:52:11  *** user2019 has quit IRC
1822019-05-07T06:52:44  <jeremyrubin> OK, so the idea of an annex is to specify a non malleable 'promise' of how much work validation will cost
1832019-05-07T06:53:16  <gmaxwell> right, or rather it's an extension mechenism which is sufficient for that application. though it might turn out to have other ones later.
1842019-05-07T06:53:23  <jeremyrubin> and if we ever see a txn which breaks that contract we ban the peer who sent or something
1852019-05-07T06:53:32  <gmaxwell> Right.
1862019-05-07T06:53:52  <jeremyrubin> gotcha -- annex is a peculiar word
1872019-05-07T06:54:13  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1882019-05-07T06:54:52  <jeremyrubin> hint/heuristic would pass the intention to me much better
1892019-05-07T06:55:01  *** mryandao has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1902019-05-07T06:55:17  <gmaxwell> It's just a general extension mechenism.
1912019-05-07T06:55:32  <jeremyrubin> But if we don't yet know what it might be for, then something more general is fine
1922019-05-07T06:55:36  <gmaxwell> The only real relationship to the application is that application requires the extension payload be in the transaction, that it be unambigiously interpertable without knowing the input script, and that it get signed.
1932019-05-07T06:56:05  <gmaxwell> (also: because of the final fork, we couldn't add the annex later so easily...)
1942019-05-07T06:56:15  <gmaxwell> (by final fork, I mean that it has to be signed)
1952019-05-07T06:56:26  <gmaxwell> otherwise we would have left it out.
1962019-05-07T06:56:30  <jeremyrubin> Ok, so new question: why *not* pass the annex to the stack?
1972019-05-07T06:56:38  <jeremyrubin> just less efficient?
1982019-05-07T06:56:51  <jeremyrubin> But seems crappy if there's a use case where you'd want to pass it
1992019-05-07T06:57:11  <gmaxwell> if you want data on the stack, just put data onto the stack.
2002019-05-07T06:57:38  <jeremyrubin> I guess we can just introduce an opcode THIS_DATA_WAS_THE_ANNEX and include it twice
2012019-05-07T06:57:57  <jeremyrubin> gmaxwell: you might both want to pass the data and know that it was the annex
2022019-05-07T06:59:03  <jeremyrubin> or I guess FETCH_ANNEX also works
2032019-05-07T06:59:26  <gmaxwell> right, though I can't imagine what this would be useful for, but sure that could be done.
2042019-05-07T07:00:58  <gmaxwell> more likely would be a particular opcode that doesn't access the annex data directly but checks an annex controlled property.
2052019-05-07T07:00:59  <jeremyrubin> Oh I do! We could enforce that if a txn is signed with an innacurate annex-as-a-validation-cost-hint it becomes anyone can spend
2062019-05-07T07:01:11  <jeremyrubin> Yeah exactly
2072019-05-07T07:01:22  <gmaxwell> like CSV doesn't directly muck about bits of the transactions serialization, it just imposes constraints on the locktime.
2082019-05-07T07:01:41  <jeremyrubin> Some sort of use case around being able to ensure that if a branch is taken, the proper annex is set
2092019-05-07T07:01:57  <jeremyrubin> (either with anyonecan spend teeth or just invalid is fine too ;) )
2102019-05-07T07:02:04  <gmaxwell> that sounds like a great way to steal a hardware wallet's coins...
2112019-05-07T07:02:55  <gmaxwell> the idea behind annex based costs is that they'd be required to be accurate (or at least greater) than the actual cost.
2122019-05-07T07:03:11  <gmaxwell> (and you could drop peers that give you junk)
2132019-05-07T07:06:24  <jeremyrubin> I guess one issue with an annex like thing is that if it's being used to do a p2sh like thing in the future as a hacky graftroot delegation scheme, we really can't pass data to it
2142019-05-07T07:07:27  <gmaxwell> there shouldn't be any reason to do that.
2152019-05-07T07:09:02  <jeremyrubin> I guess to make my point more succinctly, the encoding scheme for detecting tapscript spends and annexes feels kinda hacky
2162019-05-07T07:10:27  <jeremyrubin> We're limited by the 520 byte limit, but I wonder if we'd be better off encoding all this info into a serialized struct rather than something that has witness program semantics
2172019-05-07T07:13:10  *** mryandao has quit IRC
2182019-05-07T07:13:14  *** mryandao_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2192019-05-07T07:15:54  <jeremyrubin> Anyways, headed to sleep. will continue pondering
2202019-05-07T07:20:25  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2212019-05-07T07:22:22  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2222019-05-07T07:25:18  *** mryandao_ is now known as mryandao
2232019-05-07T07:48:33  *** IGHOR has quit IRC
2242019-05-07T07:54:07  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
2252019-05-07T08:05:28  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262019-05-07T08:30:22  *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
2272019-05-07T08:31:07  *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2282019-05-07T08:40:05  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292019-05-07T08:55:39  *** Dean_Guss has quit IRC
2302019-05-07T09:00:02  *** Guest44098 has quit IRC
2312019-05-07T09:04:13  *** beaups1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2322019-05-07T09:05:14  *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2332019-05-07T09:05:46  *** hyperwang has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2342019-05-07T09:06:48  *** jb55 has quit IRC
2352019-05-07T09:07:48  *** hyperwang has quit IRC
2362019-05-07T09:10:45  *** hyperwang has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2372019-05-07T09:12:16  *** hyperwang has quit IRC
2382019-05-07T09:25:06  *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2392019-05-07T09:28:16  *** midnightmagic has quit IRC
2402019-05-07T09:32:05  *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2412019-05-07T09:33:48  *** jb55 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2422019-05-07T09:37:03  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2432019-05-07T09:37:03  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] practicalswift opened pull request #15971: validation: Add compile-time checking for negative locking requirements in LimitValidationInterfaceQueue (master...negative-locks) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15971
2442019-05-07T09:37:08  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
2452019-05-07T09:48:37  *** shesek has quit IRC
2462019-05-07T09:50:32  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
2472019-05-07T09:53:39  *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2482019-05-07T09:56:59  *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2492019-05-07T09:57:46  <promag> MarcoFalke: do you mind reviewing #14984?
2502019-05-07T09:57:48  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14984 | rpc: Speedup getrawmempool when verbose=true by promag · Pull Request #14984 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2512019-05-07T10:00:57  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522019-05-07T10:01:06  *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2532019-05-07T10:05:16  *** midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542019-05-07T10:07:32  *** Deinogalerix21 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552019-05-07T10:07:34  *** promag has quit IRC
2562019-05-07T10:11:26  *** jtimon has quit IRC
2572019-05-07T10:17:54  <fanquake> promag I will try and review tonight. Had been meaning to review and benchmark.
2582019-05-07T10:35:44  *** stfn_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2592019-05-07T10:35:56  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
2602019-05-07T10:36:56  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2612019-05-07T10:39:59  *** stfn_ has quit IRC
2622019-05-07T10:42:24  *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2632019-05-07T10:42:44  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2642019-05-07T10:43:00  <promag> fanquake: thanks
2652019-05-07T10:43:15  * luke-jr wonders if two extra simple-wrapper abstraction layers is really necessary :x
2662019-05-07T10:48:08  *** chu-ken has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2672019-05-07T10:52:27  *** chu-ken has quit IRC
2682019-05-07T10:58:17  *** Deinogalerix21 has quit IRC
2692019-05-07T10:58:23  *** spinza has quit IRC
2702019-05-07T11:01:39  *** queip has quit IRC
2712019-05-07T11:02:57  *** rafalcpp has quit IRC
2722019-05-07T11:03:03  *** rafalcpp has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2732019-05-07T11:04:31  *** Sayoo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2742019-05-07T11:10:35  *** jonatack has quit IRC
2752019-05-07T11:11:09  *** Sayoo has quit IRC
2762019-05-07T11:11:27  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2772019-05-07T11:13:56  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2782019-05-07T11:15:42  *** queip has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2792019-05-07T11:19:54  *** promag has quit IRC
2802019-05-07T11:27:18  *** dviola has quit IRC
2812019-05-07T11:31:20  *** arubi has quit IRC
2822019-05-07T11:31:45  *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2832019-05-07T11:38:36  *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2842019-05-07T11:40:23  <hebasto> MarcoFalke: hi! are you around?
2852019-05-07T11:42:46  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2862019-05-07T11:47:13  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
2872019-05-07T11:47:52  <hebasto> Can we make a trusty build on Travis w/ depends? (refs #15276, #15308)
2882019-05-07T11:47:55  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15276 | travis: Compile once on trusty by MarcoFalke · Pull Request #15276 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2892019-05-07T11:47:56  <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15308 | build: Restore compatibility with older boost by Empact · Pull Request #15308 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2902019-05-07T11:49:03  <hebasto> Is there any reason against it?
2912019-05-07T11:51:12  *** promag has quit IRC
2922019-05-07T12:00:02  *** beaups1 has quit IRC
2932019-05-07T12:01:26  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2942019-05-07T12:01:58  *** lipsch_hth has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2952019-05-07T12:12:12  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962019-05-07T12:13:29  *** lipsch_hth has quit IRC
2972019-05-07T12:18:17  <luke-jr> hebasto: is there a reason for it?
2982019-05-07T12:18:35  <luke-jr> default reason against => adds to CI time
2992019-05-07T12:20:13  *** dermoth_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3002019-05-07T12:20:29  *** dermoth has quit IRC
3012019-05-07T12:20:31  *** dermoth_ is now known as dermoth
3022019-05-07T12:21:03  <hebasto> luke-jr: trusty uses miniupnpc 1.6 which is outdated and I'm going to clean codebase.
3032019-05-07T12:22:24  <hebasto> Is trusty build with NO_UPNP=1 a right way?
3042019-05-07T12:22:37  <luke-jr> hebasto: removing support for older libraries doesn't seem productive.
3052019-05-07T12:23:23  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
3062019-05-07T12:23:29  <hebasto> miniupnpc 1.6 is also unsafe.
3072019-05-07T12:25:04  <luke-jr> I suppose that's a good reason ☺
3082019-05-07T12:25:17  <luke-jr> NO_UPNP sounds like a good solution then
3092019-05-07T12:25:46  <luke-jr> maybe move it from the existing NO_UPNP build
3102019-05-07T12:26:06  <hebasto> luke-jr: thank you
3112019-05-07T12:33:39  *** qu4ku has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3122019-05-07T12:46:36  *** IGHOR has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3132019-05-07T13:01:29  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3142019-05-07T13:10:17  * luke-jr wonders if we should drop WalletModel now that we have interfaces::Wallet <.<
3152019-05-07T13:17:58  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3162019-05-07T13:20:44  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3172019-05-07T13:26:44  *** promag has quit IRC
3182019-05-07T13:33:25  *** laptop500 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3192019-05-07T13:34:12  *** scoop has quit IRC
3202019-05-07T13:35:32  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3212019-05-07T13:40:10  *** scoop has quit IRC
3222019-05-07T13:40:18  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3232019-05-07T13:40:41  *** goatpig has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3242019-05-07T13:48:47  *** scoop has quit IRC
3252019-05-07T14:06:59  *** davterra has quit IRC
3262019-05-07T14:07:57  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3272019-05-07T14:11:49  *** scoop has quit IRC
3282019-05-07T14:11:56  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3292019-05-07T14:13:12  *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
3302019-05-07T14:16:15  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3312019-05-07T14:16:15  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #13204: Faster sigcache nonce (master...faster-sigcache-nonce) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13204
3322019-05-07T14:16:16  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3332019-05-07T14:19:00  *** Aaronvan_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3342019-05-07T14:20:05  *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3352019-05-07T14:22:06  *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
3362019-05-07T14:23:39  *** Barras2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3372019-05-07T14:25:04  *** qu4ku has quit IRC
3382019-05-07T14:25:14  *** setpill has quit IRC
3392019-05-07T14:39:25  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3402019-05-07T14:39:25  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] HenryYoung42 opened pull request #15973: Trivial: Add explicit [[fallthrough]] to switch statement (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15973
3412019-05-07T14:39:28  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3422019-05-07T14:45:00  *** scoop has quit IRC
3432019-05-07T14:58:10  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3442019-05-07T15:00:01  *** Barras2 has quit IRC
3452019-05-07T15:02:51  *** scoop has quit IRC
3462019-05-07T15:04:28  *** AimHere1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3472019-05-07T15:06:23  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3482019-05-07T15:06:23  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #15973: Trivial: Add explicit [[fallthrough]] to switch statement (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15973
3492019-05-07T15:06:25  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3502019-05-07T15:08:12  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3512019-05-07T15:12:44  *** scoop has quit IRC
3522019-05-07T15:18:58  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3532019-05-07T15:18:58  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #15974: refactor: Avoid UniValue copy constructor (master...2019-05-copy-univalue) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15974
3542019-05-07T15:19:02  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3552019-05-07T15:21:31  *** jamesob has quit IRC
3562019-05-07T15:22:31  *** jamesob has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3572019-05-07T15:24:30  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3582019-05-07T15:24:41  *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3592019-05-07T15:24:54  *** drexl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3602019-05-07T15:30:03  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
3612019-05-07T15:31:39  *** scoop has quit IRC
3622019-05-07T15:33:23  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3632019-05-07T15:38:33  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3642019-05-07T15:38:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #15975: univalue: Drop overloaded members (master...2019-05-drop-univalue-overloads) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15975
3652019-05-07T15:38:46  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3662019-05-07T15:39:18  *** hebasto has quit IRC
3672019-05-07T15:39:55  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3682019-05-07T15:45:02  *** promag has quit IRC
3692019-05-07T15:47:12  *** _Sam-- has quit IRC
3702019-05-07T15:51:14  *** cryptokev has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3712019-05-07T15:53:18  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3722019-05-07T15:53:20  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 5 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/3632143ebbfd...b2a6b0216192
3732019-05-07T15:53:20  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1b6e6fc James O'Beirne: rename: CChainState.chainActive -> m_chain
3742019-05-07T15:53:21  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a3a6090 James O'Beirne: refactoring: introduce unused ChainActive()
3752019-05-07T15:53:22  <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 631940a James O'Beirne: scripted-diff: replace chainActive -> ::ChainActive()
3762019-05-07T15:53:24  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3772019-05-07T15:53:58  *** qrestlove has quit IRC
3782019-05-07T15:54:03  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3792019-05-07T15:54:03  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15948: refactor: rename chainActive (master...2019-05-au-chainactive) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15948
3802019-05-07T15:54:06  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3812019-05-07T16:00:58  *** scoop has quit IRC
3822019-05-07T16:01:34  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3832019-05-07T16:03:19  *** qrestlove has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3842019-05-07T16:05:47  *** scoop has quit IRC
3852019-05-07T16:09:47  *** cryptokev has quit IRC
3862019-05-07T16:10:45  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3872019-05-07T16:11:18  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3882019-05-07T16:11:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] joemphilips closed pull request #11770: [REST] add a rest endpoint for estimatesmartfee, docs, and test (master...rest_fee) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/11770
3892019-05-07T16:11:21  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3902019-05-07T16:12:28  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3912019-05-07T16:12:28  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] instagibbs closed pull request #13045: [p2p] getblock for 1-block reorgs in response to compact block message (master...cmpcttie) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13045
3922019-05-07T16:12:30  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3932019-05-07T16:13:39  *** spinza has quit IRC
3942019-05-07T16:15:44  *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3952019-05-07T16:21:54  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3962019-05-07T16:33:50  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3972019-05-07T16:33:50  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #15045: [test] Apply maximal flags to tx_valid tests and minimal flags to tx_invalid tests (master...min_txtests_flags) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15045
3982019-05-07T16:33:57  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3992019-05-07T16:34:15  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4002019-05-07T16:34:15  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke reopened pull request #15045: [test] Apply maximal flags to tx_valid tests and minimal flags to tx_invalid tests (master...min_txtests_flags) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15045
4012019-05-07T16:34:17  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4022019-05-07T16:35:48  *** jtimon has quit IRC
4032019-05-07T16:36:35  *** Emcy has quit IRC
4042019-05-07T16:37:12  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4052019-05-07T16:37:12  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] practicalswift closed pull request #15721: validation: Check absence of locks at compile-time (LOCKS_EXCLUDED) in addition to the current run-time checking (AssertLockNotHeld) (master...negative-locking-annotations) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15721
4062019-05-07T16:37:15  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4072019-05-07T16:38:40  *** Bullit has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4082019-05-07T16:39:04  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4092019-05-07T16:40:57  *** hebasto has quit IRC
4102019-05-07T16:41:03  *** hebasto_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4112019-05-07T16:45:54  *** davterra has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4122019-05-07T17:06:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4132019-05-07T17:06:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #14245: Minimize vfExec counting in script handling (master...fexec) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14245
4142019-05-07T17:06:38  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4152019-05-07T17:06:57  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4162019-05-07T17:06:58  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #14245: Minimize vfExec counting in script handling (master...fexec) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14245
4172019-05-07T17:06:59  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4182019-05-07T17:07:17  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4192019-05-07T17:07:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #14125: Add testcase to simulate bitcoin schema in leveldb (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14125
4202019-05-07T17:07:19  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4212019-05-07T17:07:28  *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4222019-05-07T17:07:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4232019-05-07T17:07:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #14125: Add testcase to simulate bitcoin schema in leveldb (master...master) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14125
4242019-05-07T17:07:38  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4252019-05-07T17:07:57  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4262019-05-07T17:07:58  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #14079: Implement sighash cache in CHECKMULTISIG (master...cms_cache) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14079
4272019-05-07T17:07:59  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4282019-05-07T17:08:17  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4292019-05-07T17:08:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #14079: Implement sighash cache in CHECKMULTISIG (master...cms_cache) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14079
4302019-05-07T17:08:19  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4312019-05-07T17:08:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4322019-05-07T17:08:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #14049: Enable libsecp256k1 ecdh module, add ECDH function to CKey (master...2018/08/bip151_ecdh) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14049
4332019-05-07T17:08:38  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4342019-05-07T17:08:56  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4352019-05-07T17:08:57  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #14049: Enable libsecp256k1 ecdh module, add ECDH function to CKey (master...2018/08/bip151_ecdh) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14049
4362019-05-07T17:08:58  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4372019-05-07T17:09:17  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4382019-05-07T17:09:18  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #14033: p2p: Drop CADDR_TIME_VERSION checks now that MIN_PEER_PROTO_VERSION is greater (master...nVersion-checks) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14033
4392019-05-07T17:09:19  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4402019-05-07T17:09:36  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4412019-05-07T17:09:37  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #14033: p2p: Drop CADDR_TIME_VERSION checks now that MIN_PEER_PROTO_VERSION is greater (master...nVersion-checks) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14033
4422019-05-07T17:09:38  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4432019-05-07T17:09:57  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4442019-05-07T17:09:58  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #13818: More intuitive GUI settings behavior when -proxy is set (master...2018/07/gui-proxy) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13818
4452019-05-07T17:09:59  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4462019-05-07T17:10:13  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4472019-05-07T17:10:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #13818: More intuitive GUI settings behavior when -proxy is set (master...2018/07/gui-proxy) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13818
4482019-05-07T17:10:15  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4492019-05-07T17:10:33  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4502019-05-07T17:10:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #13472: [devtools translations] catch invalid specifiers (master...HashUnlimited-translate-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13472
4512019-05-07T17:10:37  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4522019-05-07T17:10:53  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4532019-05-07T17:10:53  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #13472: [devtools translations] catch invalid specifiers (master...HashUnlimited-translate-1) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13472
4542019-05-07T17:10:57  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4552019-05-07T17:11:13  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4562019-05-07T17:11:13  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #13360: [Policy] Reject SIGHASH_SINGLE with output out of bound (master...insecure_single) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13360
4572019-05-07T17:11:15  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4582019-05-07T17:11:33  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4592019-05-07T17:11:33  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #13360: [Policy] Reject SIGHASH_SINGLE with output out of bound (master...insecure_single) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13360
4602019-05-07T17:11:35  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4612019-05-07T17:11:53  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4622019-05-07T17:11:53  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot closed pull request #12578: gui: Add transaction record type Fee (master...2018-03-fee-transaction-record) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12578
4632019-05-07T17:11:55  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4642019-05-07T17:12:10  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4652019-05-07T17:12:10  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] DrahtBot reopened pull request #12578: gui: Add transaction record type Fee (master...2018-03-fee-transaction-record) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/12578
4662019-05-07T17:12:22  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4672019-05-07T17:13:08  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
4682019-05-07T17:30:23  *** rex4539 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4692019-05-07T17:30:23  *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4702019-05-07T17:36:35  *** EagleTM has quit IRC
4712019-05-07T17:42:32  *** Dean_Guss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4722019-05-07T17:45:11  <wumpus> wow what's drahtbot doing
4732019-05-07T17:45:30  <gwillen> I have been told that it periodically closes and reopens old PRs to get travis to re-run
4742019-05-07T17:45:41  <gwillen> although I feel like I don't remember seeing it do this before recently
4752019-05-07T17:45:50  <gwillen> perhaps the git integration could be taught to suppress those
4762019-05-07T17:47:29  <wumpus> it does, it's just that it goes kind of wild now
4772019-05-07T17:49:28  <wumpus> hmm maybe, some kind of debouncing, if a PR is reopened within N seconds of it being closed, ignore the event
4782019-05-07T17:51:29  <gwillen> that would work, it looks like it takes about 20 seconds
4792019-05-07T17:52:11  <gwillen> if you're already keeping state for that, you could also buffer events until it's been ~60 or 90 seconds without one, before you connect to IRC and send them all
4802019-05-07T17:52:15  <gwillen> to reduce the joins and parts
4812019-05-07T17:52:45  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4822019-05-07T17:53:23  *** DougieBot5000 has quit IRC
4832019-05-07T17:54:57  *** DougieBot5000 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4842019-05-07T18:00:01  *** AimHere1 has quit IRC
4852019-05-07T18:00:08  <wumpus> right
4862019-05-07T18:04:37  *** Gaz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4872019-05-07T18:05:29  *** Guest24808 has quit IRC
4882019-05-07T18:06:00  *** pierre_rochard has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4892019-05-07T18:06:55  *** scoop has quit IRC
4902019-05-07T18:13:25  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4912019-05-07T18:18:35  *** scoop has quit IRC
4922019-05-07T18:31:54  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4932019-05-07T18:50:27  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4942019-05-07T18:50:27  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] jamesob opened pull request #15976: refactor: move methods under CChainState (pt. 1) (master...2019-05-au-cchainstate) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15976
4952019-05-07T18:50:35  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
4962019-05-07T19:09:33  *** scoop has quit IRC
4972019-05-07T19:10:09  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4982019-05-07T19:12:16  *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4992019-05-07T19:12:45  *** Dean_Guss has quit IRC
5002019-05-07T19:16:12  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5012019-05-07T19:17:23  *** scoop has quit IRC
5022019-05-07T19:20:25  *** promag has quit IRC
5032019-05-07T19:26:12  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5042019-05-07T19:29:38  <provoostenator> (I shadowbanned myself again, really need to fix my bouncer setup)
5052019-05-07T19:29:58  <sipa> ?
5062019-05-07T19:30:13  *** juscamarena2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5072019-05-07T19:30:26  <provoostenator> Basically my IRC client shows my messages in the channel, but they don't actually show up.
5082019-05-07T19:30:26  *** scoop has quit IRC
5092019-05-07T19:30:34  <provoostenator> Until I do an /identify
5102019-05-07T19:30:45  <provoostenator> Whereas DMs work fine.
5112019-05-07T19:31:12  <provoostenator> This started happening on and off a weeks ago, so it's probably a useful security feature, just lack of error handling in client (Textual)
5122019-05-07T19:31:41  <sipa> sounds like you need a better irc client
5132019-05-07T19:32:13  <provoostenator> Indeed
5142019-05-07T19:32:14  <provoostenator> sipa: can you make a pull request to yourself with the "tapoot" brach, or a Draft pull request to Bitcoin Core? I find that easier to review than just a branch.
5152019-05-07T19:32:39  <provoostenator> PR description is also a nice place for "try these steps to test this"
5162019-05-07T19:32:53  <sipa> provoostenator: no, i think it's far too early for that
5172019-05-07T19:33:06  <provoostenator> Isn't that what the Draft feature is for?
5182019-05-07T19:33:13  <sipa> the code is there for demonstration, to see what kind of complexity is involved, but review at this point should be on the bip
5192019-05-07T19:33:57  <provoostenator> Right, it's tempting to review in too much detail, that makes sense.
5202019-05-07T19:44:09  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
5212019-05-07T19:49:54  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5222019-05-07T20:09:17  *** timothy has quit IRC
5232019-05-07T20:14:29  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5242019-05-07T20:15:49  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5252019-05-07T20:17:24  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5262019-05-07T20:18:00  *** ddustin has quit IRC
5272019-05-07T20:18:04  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5282019-05-07T20:18:39  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5292019-05-07T20:22:16  *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5302019-05-07T20:22:16  <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke reopened pull request #13204: Faster sigcache nonce (master...faster-sigcache-nonce) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/13204
5312019-05-07T20:22:17  *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5322019-05-07T20:22:26  *** promag has quit IRC
5332019-05-07T20:53:20  <jeremyrubin> jamesob: is there a tool you're using to auto-run those benchmarks?
5342019-05-07T20:53:56  <jamesob> jeremyrubin: a yet-to-be-release branch of https://github.com/chaincodelabs/bitcoinperf
5352019-05-07T20:54:06  <jamesob> going to package it up in the next few days (hopefully)
5362019-05-07T20:54:35  <jamesob> and then at some point maybe we'll have a service that'll autorun it based on presence of tag or something
5372019-05-07T20:55:07  <jeremyrubin> that is dope, good work!
5382019-05-07T20:55:50  <jamesob> jeremyrubin: thanks man! if you wanna fool around the branch is here: https://github.com/chaincodelabs/bitcoinperf/tree/ibd-improvements
5392019-05-07T21:00:02  *** Gaz has quit IRC
5402019-05-07T21:04:16  *** promag_ has quit IRC
5412019-05-07T21:04:44  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5422019-05-07T21:05:19  *** promag_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5432019-05-07T21:05:44  *** feedoo1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5442019-05-07T21:09:16  *** promag has quit IRC
5452019-05-07T21:16:36  *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
5462019-05-07T21:22:15  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
5472019-05-07T21:26:41  <gmaxwell> the drahbot thing makes ordering prs by activity suck, btw.
5482019-05-07T21:29:02  <luke-jr> :<
5492019-05-07T21:29:12  <luke-jr> why can't it just trigger Travis restarts directly?
5502019-05-07T21:35:03  <gmaxwell> jamesob: thansk for benchmarking that PR. It'll be interesting if its not actually faster (as that woudl imply copying a hasher is slower than creating one plus one compression run ... which if its true suggests something else needs to be fixed). This is why we test, of course.
5512019-05-07T21:36:11  *** scoop has quit IRC
5522019-05-07T21:37:01  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5532019-05-07T21:38:11  *** BGL has quit IRC
5542019-05-07T21:40:54  *** ddustin has quit IRC
5552019-05-07T21:41:12  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5562019-05-07T21:41:21  *** scoop has quit IRC
5572019-05-07T21:41:40  *** ddustin has quit IRC
5582019-05-07T21:41:57  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5592019-05-07T21:42:47  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5602019-05-07T21:43:24  *** rex4539 has quit IRC
5612019-05-07T21:43:31  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5622019-05-07T21:43:52  *** Skirmant has quit IRC
5632019-05-07T21:44:00  *** ddustin has quit IRC
5642019-05-07T21:44:37  *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5652019-05-07T21:48:42  *** ddustin has quit IRC
5662019-05-07T21:51:37  *** kexkey has quit IRC
5672019-05-07T21:51:38  <achow101> luke-jr: how would it?
5682019-05-07T21:52:53  <achow101> i don't think you can have travis start a build on a pr as if a new commit was pushed. iirc the point of closing and reopening triggers travis to do a new build which means it will use the merge commit with the current master which is what we want
5692019-05-07T21:56:39  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5702019-05-07T21:56:53  *** Aaronvan_ is now known as AaronvanW
5712019-05-07T22:07:01  <jamesob> gmaxwell: sure thing. Left another bench running against the rebase, but afk. Will report back
5722019-05-07T22:15:28  *** Emcy has quit IRC
5732019-05-07T22:16:08  *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5742019-05-07T22:29:25  *** Zenton has quit IRC
5752019-05-07T22:38:36  *** spinza has quit IRC
5762019-05-07T22:46:52  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5772019-05-07T22:52:18  *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5782019-05-07T22:53:47  *** boipiecer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5792019-05-07T22:54:21  *** boipiecer has quit IRC
5802019-05-07T22:56:56  *** promag has quit IRC
5812019-05-07T23:01:48  *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5822019-05-07T23:13:26  *** BGL has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5832019-05-07T23:17:19  *** scoop has quit IRC
5842019-05-07T23:19:10  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5852019-05-07T23:20:35  <fanquake> Surely we'd be able to use something like https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/triggering-builds/ ?
5862019-05-07T23:26:04  *** jhfrontz has quit IRC
5872019-05-07T23:34:58  *** spinza has quit IRC
5882019-05-07T23:38:42  *** scoop has quit IRC
5892019-05-07T23:39:56  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5902019-05-07T23:42:05  *** fanquake has quit IRC
5912019-05-07T23:44:22  *** scoop has quit IRC
5922019-05-07T23:51:03  *** juscamarena2 has quit IRC
5932019-05-07T23:55:30  *** laptop500 has quit IRC
5942019-05-07T23:55:48  *** scoop has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5952019-05-07T23:58:36  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5962019-05-07T23:58:38  *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev