►
From YouTube: Ethereum Core Devs Meeting #80 [2020-2-7]
Description
A
A
B
B
No,
he
came
up
last
I,
don't
know
how
many
months
ago,
for
the
previous
out,
for
it
was
also
proposed
and
I.
Remember
having
occurred
briefly,
mentioning
it,
but
yeah
I
mean
so
I
can
describe
it.
So
basically,
currently
the
evm
opcode
for
like
the
cola
codes,
you
say
they
have
a
gas
parameter
and
gas
parameter
is
basically
only
a
maximum
value.
B
So
it
only
protects
the
color
for
spending
that
much
gas,
but
it
doesn't
have
any
guarantee
for
the
colleague
to
receive
that
amount
of
gas,
and
so
this
cause
so
I
mean
in
itself
is
okay.
But
then
there
is
use
case
where
we
need
to
be
sure
that
the
curly
adhesive
exactly
a
specific
amount
of
gas.
The
main
one
is
metal
transaction,
for
example,
where
the
signer
of
the
transaction
specify
how
much
gas
is
in
a
coal,
and
so
the
contract
need
to
ensure
that,
and
there
is
no
perfect
way
to
do
it.
B
So
I'm
I
described
it
in
more
detail
in
zoom
in
the
issue,
but
basically
is
the
proposal
is
to
so.
There
is
two
way
to
today's
to
proper
I
mean
to
option
for
the
proposal
to
to
work.
One
is
to
make
the
simplest
in
my
opinion,
is
to
add
three
new
occurred,
that
of
the
semantics
of.
If
you
don't
have
enough
gas
to
make
the
call,
then
it
revert.
B
Yes,
so
ins,
so
we
want
to
solve
it
in
the
color
or
not
in
the
curly,
because
that's
the
logic
of
the
color
might
be
dependent
and
in
the
color,
if
we
can,
as
I
say,
we
can
compute
the
gas
cost
required
based
on
the
amount
of
data
except
a
lot
to
kind
of
click.
Compute.
There
is
two
issue
with
that
is
that
it's
dependent
of
the
OP
code
pricing,
not
changing,
and
the
second
issue
is
that
it's
a
waste
because
you
are
computing,
something
that
the
EVM
is
already
computed.
Yeah.
C
B
For
the
use
case,
I
mean
yes
in
meta
transaction.
There
is
two
two
way
kind
of
to
for
the
relay
or
to
do
use.
The
first
implementation
of
method,
transaction
was
actually
very
simple.
Is
that
the
layer
was
taking
responsibility
of
the
world
transaction
not
failing
so
is
that
it
makes
the
transaction.
If
it
fail,
then
it
is
mistake.
You
should
have
checked
that
it
was
not
failing,
but
it's
a
lot
harder
for
the
vallejo,
because
you
need
to
consider
everything
so
every
reason
that
this
the
call
my
actually
fail.
B
B
The
problem
is
that
all
of
this
implementation-
except
a
few
say
actually
is
the
only
thing
they
do
is
they
say,
require
gas
Greta's
and
the
gas
required,
which
is
actually
not
sufficient,
for.
Why
is
that
not
sufficient?
Because
there
is
164
of
the
gas
left
anyway
so
which
means
that,
even
if
the
gas
could
be
higher.
C
B
Exactly
so,
then
you
are
pushing
the
security
outside
of
the
contract,
which
is
what
goodness
is
safe
decided
to
do.
So
there
is
an
issue
on
the
people
decided
to
fix
it
on
on
the
UI
side,
whereas
the
UI
actually
increase
the
gas
limit
so
that
he
contacts
the
user
but
I
think
it's
basically
moving
the
security
on
the
layer
that
he
should
not
be
I.
C
B
C
B
Say
just
on
that
point
because
I
think
it's
it's
actually
reverse,
because
if,
if
the
gal,
if
the
coal,
where
you
used
especially
the
gas,
then
the
color
will
not
even
need
to
ask
for
what
is
gas
left,
because
without
that
opcode?
Currently,
as
you
said,
they
need
to
check
the
gas
and
try
to
do
some
computation
to
make
sure
it's
enough.
While
if
we
add
the
copper
I
mean
restrict
gas
semantics,
then
they
will
no
need
for
the
color
to
check
what
the
gas
available.
B
B
Let's
I
think,
let's
focus
on
whether
something
is
better
or
not,
because
what
we
are
going
to
solve.
Now
my
helpers
to
design
a
new
EVM
later
so
I
think
we
should
try
to
do
something.
I
mean
anyway,
so
I
just
want
to
go
back
to
the
point
of
three
newer
code,
because
in
the
proposal
there
is
two
option.
One
is
three
in
your
code
and
can
and
then
the
other
option
is
to
find
gas
values
that
have
never
been
used
before,
which
might
be
tricky
to
kind
of
check.
D
Have
some
if
I
put
out
Aleksey,
isn't
here
today,
so
me
putting
on
my
Alexia?
How
does
this
because
he's
working
on
look
in
evaluating
whether
you
one
guess
or
to
do
something
else
that
allows
state
was
happen
to
those
and
I
guess
how
to
work
with
gas
changes
he's
currently
working
on?
You
have
have
you
looked
into
on
gas
and
how
perhaps
your
proposal
might
be
different
if,
in
that
scenario
or
really
I
would
just
suggest
something
like
see.
I
looked.
B
At
and
guess
I
mean
I.
I
listened
to
the
last
call,
I
mean
and
gas
itself
at
it's
a
bit
very,
very
big
question
anyway.
So
I
don't
think
we
should
I
mean
so.
First
of
all,
is
that
imagine
we
add
the
extra
gas
me
cementing
before
and
we
want
to
move
to
an
gas.
It
would
be
the
same
as
now
to
move
to
hang
gas.
So
what
I
mean
is
that
we
should
not
differ.
Something
is
because
maybe
and
gas
will
happen
if
it
doesn't
change
as
a
matter.
D
And
that's
the
that's
part
of
what
I'm
wondering
is
because
Alexi
is
also
thinking
of
the
other
side.
I!
Guess
it's
not
so
much
that
I'm
saying:
let's:
let's
wait
because
it's
down
the
line
is
Lujan's
coming
I.
Don't
personally
like
doing
that.
I
know
that
something
is
needing
to
happen
with
stateless
aetherium
to
have
Alexi
is
currently
working
on
that
I
didn't
go
to
him
about
unguessed
and
then
also
dissolved
on
gas.
Easy
to
see.
D
C
B
B
C
A
B
A
Yeah
I
think
that
would
help
us
like
understand
a
little
bit
more,
what
the
main,
what
like
the
exact
main
objective,
because
the
simple
summary
is
like
what
it
wants
to
do,
but
it
doesn't
there's
like
we're
missing.
Is
their
motivation
section
in
here
that
I'm
missing
I
think
this
is
using
an
older
CIP.
A
A
So
if
you
could
change
that
up
and
then
the
other
suggestion
is
to
talk
to
alexei
only
because
they
there's
a
whole
separate,
eath
1x
meeting
and
what
they
do,
is
they
talk
about
bigger,
sweeping
changes
to
the
1.0
ecosystem
and
if
any
of
that's
going
to
interact
with
any
of
the
changes
here
we
just
like
to
get
those
connections
made.
You.
B
F
E
A
E
Yeah
I,
like
my
opinion,
let's
see
so
it's
is
kind
of
like
you,
my
my
only
something
I
think
it's
the
opposite
direction
we
want
to
go
to
because
after
if
we
do
those
like
to
those
things
like
like
in
this
AIT
even
is
even
harder
to
later
change,
guys
cause
which
will
have
a
bigger
back
workability
issues.
So.
B
E
Just
looking
through
the
specification
so
I,
just
from
the
specification
side,
I
think
there
are
something
that
can
be,
can
be
more
like
well,
more
specified,
for
example,
in
the
option.
8
simply
says,
add
a
new
versions
of,
of
course,
but
we
need
to
know
what
this
new
world
is
and
how
much
has
it
called
how
it
houses
of
karate
works,
yeah.
B
B
The
ungass
I
just
want
to
clarify
something
because
it
won't
add
any
extras
like
we
have
we
our
contract,
that
already
asked
for
gas.
This
one
would
be
an
issue
for
ungass,
but
this
one
actually
doesn't
require
of
the
contract
to
get
the
gas
it's
a
it's
a
requirement
of,
so
it's
Miriam
yest
will
need
to
get
to
gas,
but
not
the
contract
itself.
A
C
A
C
G
H
C
A
Okay,
so
the
next
EIP
we
have
is
from
greg
listed
as
Gandalf
on
here
and
it's
a
IP
23:15
simple
subroutines
for
the
evm.
This
one
is
up
for
efi
and
greg.
If
you
want
just
go
over
real
quick
what
it
is
and
then
we'll
have
questions
and
there's
also
an
ethereal
magicians
link
in
here.
If
people
want
to
click
on
that
too
yeah.
G
And
there's
other
discussion
back
when
it
was
an
issue
and
that's
linked
back
through
the
magician's
link
and
a
bit
of
discussion
on
the
pull
request,
and
basically
this
is
a
totally
stripped-down
615,
no
validation,
just
providing
the
mechanism
of
callin
return.
Just
the
mechanism
and
any
validation
any
such
is
moved
out
of
the
vm
to
the
next
layer
up
for
the
time
being.
G
So
it's
just
simply
the
mechanism
that
says
I'm,
making
a
subroutine
call
so
I,
take
the
current
instruction
pointer
and
push
it
on
a
second
stack
just
like
forth
and
when
I
need
to
return
I
pop
the
stack
and
go
back
to
where
I
was
that's
it.
You
know
the
same,
call
and
return
that
most
chips
have
had,
since
there
were
chips
and
that's
about
all
there
is
to
it.
There's
a
there's.
G
A
G
A
G
G
G
C
Yeah,
so,
regarding
the
test
cases,
I'm
not
sure
if
the
so
these
are
traces
or
these
traces
or
the
programs
or
the
kind
of
combine.
You
think
it
would
be
easier
if
you
put
the
program
bytecode
or
assembly
in
one
thing
and
then
the
kind
of
trace
as
another.
So
so
it
will
be
easier
to
understand
how
the
PC
jumps
when
you
execute
the
code,
and
one
thing
that
I
am
wondering
about
right
now
is
the
return
sub.
C
G
C
G
G
C
G
So
P
who
wanted
go?
It's
obvious
I
really
wanted
another
people
to
go.
Well,
you
don't
really
need
it,
because
you
can
play
this
complicated
game
of
using
using
the
existing
stack
and
pushing
things
there.
And
then,
when
you
finish,
the
routine
you've
got
to
figure
out.
You
know
how
far
away
is
the
return
address
that
I
pushed
on
the
main
stack
and
there's
a
whole
class
of
bugs
of
overwriting
the
return
address,
because
it's
on
the
same
stack
that
you're
computing.
G
G
D
This
is
a
zoom
out
a
little
bit
on
the
status
on
its
status
as
efi,
and
it
going
back
to
the
first
question
passing
my
mind
back
to
previously
with
originally
IP
the
general
feedback
was
that
good
idea,
it's
more
complicated,
there's
more
things
going
on
that
needs
to
happen
all
up
like
it
doesn't
need
all
happen
at
once,
and
then
this
is
the.
This
is
the
response
to
that
feedback,
so
in
general,
I
think
unless
Thursday.
D
I
A
C
G
A
D
G
A
A
F
Well,
updates
for
mostly
internal,
more
or
less
changed
by
new
interface,
a
little
to
allow
users
to
like
to
remove
some
restrictions
and
also
to
make
some
checks
inside
this
app
recompile
optional,
because
most
of
the
cases,
I
kind
of
not
necessary
for
practical
applications,
that's
well.
They
are
optional,
so
you
can
just
specify
one
right
to
change
it
back
on
others
in
this.
What's
left
right
now,
it's
an
integration
and
Elsa
alternative
implementation
of
in
go
which
doesn't
use
assembly
site,
which
may
be
also
here
but
he's
listening
on
the
YouTube.
F
A
J
I'm
just
going
to
come
in
because
I
very
strong
feeling
gets
the
CIP
and
not
against
Alex
work,
but
again
the
the
scope
and
and
the
NDC
API
I
discuss
with
various
people
offline
about
it
and
express
them
some
major
concern
not
on
the
quality
of
work
of
the
matter
and
not
on
the
need
for
the
IP
itself,
but
by
the
process.
It's
it's
getting
through.
At
this
point.
C
A
D
J
I
understand
that,
but
my
point
is
and
Alex
I'm
talking,
because
I
think
it's
actually
like
you
didn't
filter
if
ik
job
at
this
point,
but
when
with
the
style,
VC
IP
I
have
very
big
concerned
because
things
like
we
just
like
Windows
just
release
the
ball
and
it's
the
NSA
release
the
bug
on
the
implementation
of
like
any
curve
cryptography
in
Windows
and
you're
single,
like
single
team
and,
like
both
happen
with
windows
in
having
this
sort
of
giantic
pre-compile
or
served
frickin
time
inside.
The
network
is
from
your
risk
of
concern.
F
Was
the
reason?
Yes,
it
was
the
reason
why
people
asked
for
fuzzy
testing
from
the
beginning,
and
this
is
the
reason
why
we
have
it
kind
of
running
all
the
time,
and
especially
after
some
kind
of
minor
changes
in
value
interfaces
and
their
cells
is
the
reason
why
we
have
now
suite
dependent
implementations,
III.
J
That
said,
I
just
want
to
bring
it
up,
because
there
is
another
VIP.
The
this
concern
I'm
expressing
right
now,
I
kind
of
try
to
express
it
before
when
I
asked
you
that
style,
but
the
auditing
poor
and
very
having
an
independent
team.
Looking
at
the
implementation,
looking
at
the
specification
looking
at
the
API
and
and
so
offline
I,
there
was
a
proposal
from
Jordi
I
know
if
you
saw
it
about
the
job
job.
J
J
F
J
F
F
J
F
Well,
it's
first
of
all
baby
chap
job
with
Edward
skur,
and
this
is
like,
even
while
twisted
adverse
curves
believed
to
be
and
of
much
not
simpler
to
implement
they
simply
to
implement
in
constant
time.
This
curve
is
very
specific.
It's
only
for
caching
and
doesn't
give
a
kind
of
a
lot
of
benefits.
It
just
allows
you
to
use
algebraic
caches
in
the
stream
for
just
for
a
cheap.
This.
G
K
I
G
E
F
E
J
F
C
So,
typically,
we
would
get
on
the
get
on
a
call
with
the
core
developers
of
like
the
clients
and
buy
core
developers.
In
this
sense,
I
mean
people
who
actually
commit
code
to
the
clients
and
the
problem
with
these
kind
of
pre-compile
symbols
and
similar
problem
with
one
of
the
PNP
compiles.
Is
that
it's
not
our
domain
and
when
something
if
something
were
to
go
wrong
like
either
consensus
issue
where
oh,
it
happened
at
the
co.
C
Implementation
was
different
than
the
rust
implementation,
or
if
there
was
some
vulnerability
where
I
don't
know,
the
gasps
calculation
was
too
intense
or
some
vector
there's,
basically
nothing
we
could
do
because
we
would
scratch
our
heads
and
not
understand
a
single
thing,
because
it's
not
our
domain
and
this
so
yeah.
This
eats
this.
He
scares
me
a
lot
and
I'm,
not
even
talking
about
the
possibility
of
cryptographic
errors.
C
F
In
terms
of
vector
as
well
yeah
well
in
terms
of
like
very
trivial
mistakes
and
like
a
dos
attacks,
there
are
no
infinite
loops.
Obviously,
inside
system
precompile,
all
the
loops
are
bounded
like
upper
bounds
were
used
in
gas
prices.
Tomates
I
have
already
proposed
that
I
can
just
introduce
an
arbitrary
fact
of,
like
1.5
everywhere
for
security.
F
Now,
when
the
precompile
is
already
up
to
my
standard
to
the
previous,
like
choose
the
old
values
for
a
gas
pricing,
it
now
actually
already
runs
faster.
Then
it
kind
of
wants
an
amount
of
gas
to
be
paid
to
it.
So,
for
this
part
I'm
much
less
concerned,
my
cursor
was
about
indeed
the
consensus
between
different
implementations,
but,
as
scandal
has
experienced
in
the
last
months,
Placid
testing,
we
say
together
and
working
with
him.
F
It's
not
set
large
of
an
issue
most
of
the
errors
which
we
found
Jimmy
the
facet
testing
and
discrepancy
were
actually
in,
not
in
underlying
formulas
or
arithmetic.
So
anywhere
it
was
in
a
binary
interface,
which
we
isn't
fixed
and,
like
arithmetic
errors,
are
I.
Think
we
only
encountered.
One
between
different
implementations
were
also
the
faulty
testing,
and
just
because
we
used
two
different
polarities.
A
So
when
we're
kind
of
doing
a
risk
versus
reward
here,
this
is
going
to
enable
a
lot
more
use
cases
and
able
a
lot
more
different
curves
that
can
be
used
for
some
of
the
new
Stark
and
Stark
stuff.
That's
happening
at
the
same
time
than
Martin,
saying
and
Luis
are
saying
that
this
it
is
risky,
because
if
there
is
an
attack
of
any
kind
using
it,
we
would
be
a
little
out
of
the
loop
because
it's
out
of
our
knowledge
domain.
F
J
Can
I
offer
a
solution
here
for
for
the
next
call,
could
you
bring
Zach
from
Aztec
because
you
talk
about
drunk?
Can
you
bring
Isaac
from
coda
to
talk
about
recursive
and
also
reach
out
to
to
to
Geordi
to
seal
that?
How
your
to
propose
on
couch,
if
the
IP
could
be
merged
into
yours,
I
think
there
would
be
like
a
way
to
solve
this.
For.
F
J
F
Well,
here,
I
should
correct
your
impression
that
when
I,
say
and
well
wealthy
pre-compile
sales
kind
of
MIT
curse
as
an
example,
it's
basically
just
one
type
of
the
pairings
of
their
particular.
A
structure
of
the
curve
would
say
that
kind
of
the
same
stuff
can
be
done
like
this
is
a
sexy
curve.
For
example,
sexy
construction,
yeah.
E
F
J
Of
course,
that's
what
I
mean,
for
instance,
I
know
that
my
name
is
need
for
me.
Why
I
mean
if
I
mean
a
lot,
if
is
aware,
but
last
time
I
talked
to
him,
I
wasn't
sure
you
got
involved
and
I'm
pretty
sure
you
will
be
interested.
My
point
is
I.
Guess
there
is
a
right
if
VIP
is
useful.
I
agree
with
you.
J
My
only
concern
at
this
point
is
in
the
process,
meaning
that
you
are
you
be
the
only
one
having
an
eye
on
it
and
what
I'm
for
expressing
right
now
is
trying
to
find
a
way
to
for
this
with
quorum
of
people
to
be
to
be
convinced
that
these
can
get
in
without
any
concern,
because
we
have
all
the
specialists
in
the
field
today
in
the
community
to
do
that.
Much
for
it
because
they're
going
to
use
it.
A
I
think
the
threshold
I
think
the
threshold
is
aver
is
a
bit
different.
I,
don't
think
it
needs
to
come
in
with
little
conceived,
Airy
little
concerned,
because
that's
just
impossible
for
for
many
pre
compiles
unless
they're
very,
very,
very
simple
to
come
in
without
some
level
of
concern,
but
I
think
if
there
are
just
solid
I,
don't
know,
I'd
feel
better
from
my
like
when
I've
responded
to
incidents
knowing
who
to
call-
and
that's
Alex
said
that
we
would
be,
him
could
also
find
other
people
and
yeah.
That
would
make
me
I.
F
Should
I
should
actors?
Is
it
a
few
times
before
it
I
kind
of
for
ease
of
developer,
like
for
ease
of
kind
of
integration
and
roll
out
of
this
recompile
I
was
kind
of
trying
to
mention.
Since
there
is
an
option,
you
can
do
it
in
kind
of
two
waves
in
the
first
one
we
just
kind
of
make
a
whitelist
as
Lewis
was
saying
that
kind
of
the
setosa
curves,
which
he
uses
it's
not
very
like
which
are
well-known
and
most
likely
no
well
known
by
the
community.
It's
not
very
wide,
it's
more
or
less.
F
We
can
make
a
list
of
ten
curves
which
are
allowed
to
use
it
still
the
same
code
base.
They
just
want
additional
check
at
the
entry
point.
Well,
this
gap
curve
parameters
in
whitelist
and
for
those
wells
also
kind
of
explicitly
check
for
Mattox.
If
you
call
for
this
curve,
it
definitely
works,
but
I
didn't
ever
get
any
like
strong
feedback
and
whether
this
auction
yeah.
A
F
Well,
I
mean
it's
kind
of
less
surface
for
exposure
in
terms
of
this.
That,
of
course,
is
just
like
it's
the
same
code
base
which
works
with
them,
so
it
just
still
as
a
same
pre-compile,
which
you
can
kind
of
test
battlefield
test,
was
the
first
wave
of
just
a
white
list
of
ten
like
ten
twelve
curves
maximising
if
it
works
well
and
which
access
we
continue
to
work
in
this,
and
we
just
leaves
this
one.
F
D
D
F
Sure
I
mean
it's
more:
it's
not
more
or
less
than
my
side
I
just
sorted.
That
is
my
obvious
responsibility
to
be
there
for
time
limits
included
and
like
people
start
using
it
and
see
what
people
can
make
app
and
attack
it.
Yeah
I
just
don't
know
how
the
security
team
worries
I,
hear
the
church
that
it's
kind
of
exist,
but
I
never
been
a
part
in
this
and
I'm,
seeing
it
working
this.
A
D
E
J
Rather,
take
this
offline
and
bring
I
think
we
should
bring
also
the
people
we
were
mentioned:
Jordy
Zach,
Isaac
and
me
from
from
UI
to
to
to
comment
to
come
in
comments
and
their
ability,
both
to
like
judge
the
quality
of
the
API
in
the
code
and
also
in
their
current
need
and
what
they
feel
about
such
a
true.
Why
do
I
be
yeah
so.
L
C
C
Yes
likely
but
I
every
time,
I
try
to
look
into
it
like
now.
I'm
browsing
around
and
I'm
come
to
guess
schedule
and
it's
like
I,
never
see
the
very
solemn
see
concrete
actual
specifications
like
I'm
used
to
when
I'm
browsing
oops.
It's
a
lot
of
text
and
a
lot
of
mathematical
language
that
assume
that
the
reader
knows
lots
of
definitions
that
are
apparent
to
the
author,
but
they
specification
I
do
not
think
it
is
possible
for
anyone
to
write
this
eat
based
on
the
existing
specifications.
F
Well,
if
you
have
comments
for
like
style
or
writing,
which
can
be
more
understandable
for
people
not
in
the
field,
because
I
still
try
to
use
more
or
less
kind
of
standard
notation
and
it
where
you
walk
all
this
way.
I
just
use
the
same
name
everywhere.
But
if
you
have
this,
you
can
just
post
it
in
negator
or
something
personal.
C
F
F
E
J
Have
a
question
for
you:
I'm
going
to
put
the
the
Jordi's
valine
as
a
VIP
like
naughty
education,
either
one
five,
but
it's
it's
the
IP,
that
of
the
Geordie
and
the
and
the
the
formatting
of
it.
Could
you
have
a
look
and
tell
me
if
that's
will
be
clear
on
your
eyes,
like
would
be
something
that
should
be
comfortable
with?
In
that
case,
Alex
could
converge
with
with
Geordie
to
to
tube
team
either
I
know.
J
George
is
interesting
this
and
you
IP
and
ex-employer,
and
bring
it
up
because
I
discussed
with
him
offline
and
yeah
I
similar
concern
about
the
formatting
of
the
other
of
the
proposal.
So
Matt
was
the
reason
I'm
asking
George
in
the
martinis
to
see.
If
that's
formatting
is
good
enough
for
him,
so
we
can
find
like
a
way
to
to
cross
bridge
here.
A
Yeah
and
actually
that's
that's
a
good
idea,
because
if
this,
if
the
formatting
that
they're
using
for
the
baby
Jubjub
curve
is
like
more
clear,
then
yeah,
if
you
could
converge
on
that
style,
that'd
be
nice.
Also
I
saw
that
Kobe
is
working
with
you.
I
could
consider
Kobe
a
good
resource.
Did
he
actually
helped
write
the
EIP
or
just
work
on
the
implementation
with
you.
F
A
F
Yeah
I
I'm,
just
looking
at
say,
Georgie's
proposal
and
I-
think
it's
still
as
difficult
for
people
to
understand
that
baby
cheetah
is
a
mr.
Thurber
skirt,
which
is
probational
equivalent
to
some
Montgomery
curve,
which
are
still
fine
for
people
who
are
in
the
field,
but
completely
useless
information
yeah.
They
just
I,
think
it's
kind
of
more
the
same
language
of
complexity.
I
will
try
to
to
fight
myself.
If,
if
people
don't
shoot
me
a
feedback,
but
I
mean
it's
not
trivial,
but
underlying
formulas
you
can
get
into
some
reception.
Quite
trivial
I
have.
J
A
A
Now
there's
record
it's:
it
was
a
collaboration
between
the
well,
what
is
now
the
electric
coin
company
and
the
etherium
foundation
at
the
time
to
implement
the
same
curve
that
was
used
in
the
cash
at
the
time.
I
think
they
changed
now
and
they
did
change
okay,
and
that
was
basically
engineers
coordinated
with
the
C++
team
and
they
made
it
and
then
I'm
fuzzy
on
the
rest
of
it
does
anyone
who
was
there
back
then?
Maybe
Mart
know
what
happened
after
that.
So.
A
That's
that's.
That's
the
other
thing
like
it
was
still.
It
still
took
a
long
time,
but
because
it
was
a
single
curve
and
there
was
some
understanding
I
think
we
had
a
cryptographer
at
the
time,
Daniel
working
more
for
us
who
helped
a
little
I
think.
So
there
was
basically
the
it's
not
that
there
was
any
shortcuts
taken
back.
Then
it
was
just
a
more
simple
IP
and
there
was
like
collaboration
from
another
company
with
our
team
that
did
understand
the
curve.
I
think
it.
J
A
A
F
A
H
K
F
H
H
This
is
from
like
a
researchers
on
e
tune.
I've
done
my
own
kind
of
investigation.
I
think
it
does
not
so
the
other
question
that
kind
of
had
was
if
1960
based
on
today's
conversation
seems
to
need
a
lot
more
work.
Would
it
be
feasible
if
I
order
me
to
simply
create
a
standalone
VIP
that
covers
the
beulas
verification
we
need
simply
because
the
deposit
contract
currently
covers
it
has
like
there's
four
main
checks
that
we
can
do,
and
the
one
check
we
don't
have
is
the
verification.
F
From
this
perspective,
like
if
I
may,
advise
you
like
or
make
your
life
simpler,
I
can
just
expose
you
one
interface
to
just
work
on
one
specific
curve.
If
you
like,
really
really
really
want
a
simple,
separate
precompile,
the
that's
only
realistic,
and
what
is
existing
right
now
is
just
if
it
makes
your
life
easier.
Can.
A
H
J
M
H
H
K
H
I'll
get
them
to
come
on
next
time
to
chat
about
the
differences.
I
know.
There's
things
between
the
current
one
was
questionable
in
the
gaps
as
well.
I
was
like
how
much
gases
means,
because
the
contractor
he
kind
of
consumes
quite
a
bit,
but
yeah
can
based
on
today's
call
already
on,
like
the
push
back
on
1962
I,
think
I
kind
of
separate
discussions
to
occur
anyway.
Great
look,
I
just
want
you.
J
A
H
Actually
finished
it
yeah,
so
like
it's
great,
so
we
already
have
that,
so
we
would
just
have
to
get
them
to
redo
like
two
lines,
which
is
unlike
the
end
of
the
world
problem
is
the
con
trucks
and
Viper,
but
I
might
just
have
a
rear
end
and
like
bytecode
to
make
it
easier
taught
it
because
they're
all
my
god,
we
need
fiber.
Compiler
I
got
straight
up.
H
A
That
I
saw
okay
cool.
Alright,
let's
have
people
come
on
next
time,
Alex
if
you're,
if
you
could
come
on
again
and
potentially
bring
some
of
the
people.
Louis
said
that
will
have
this
be
a
major
topic
next
time.
So
we
can
kind
of
you
know
get
this
get
this
through
without
too
much
more
commentary
and
make
sure
everyone
feels
as
comfortable
as
they
can.
A
C
I
To
voice
a
couple
concerns
on
it,
so
we
can
get
it
a
little
bit.
Oh
sure.
Yes,
we
first
need
to
have
some
clear
definition
on
what
the
frickin
files
are.
Oh,
my,
you
know
there
was
other
stuff
to
try
and
give
a
larger
range
to
say
it's,
the
first
thousand
modesta
and
the
right,
but
does
it
we
should
reference
going
formulas
can
also
imply
all
future
games.
We're
gonna
do
that
or
we
could
specify
a
range.
My
second
concern
is
we're.
Probably
gonna
need
a
reprise.
I
F
A
I
C
A
J
J
C
C
J
Yeah,
so
one
okay,
one
Blake
to
be
the
compression,
is
twelve
round
in
any
case,
so
it
would
be
tasty.
Oh,
we
still
have
like
a
cost
of
the
first
part
in
there,
that's
for
being
in
the
contract,
but
the
compression
function
is
would
like
to
be
12
round,
which
would
be
twelve
gas,
which
is
roughly
what
you
have
for
in
relation
to
to
k-chat
without
the
the
two
combining
part
that
you
have
to
actually
get
the
correct
output.
A
A
There
should
be
a
good
wish
of
anak
an
effort
in
the
future
to
like
have
more
than
just
a
couple.
People
like
running
the
benchmarks
needed
for
this
stuff
because
it
sounds
like
there's
a
lot
of
history
being
lost
and
how
some
of
this
came
to
be,
but
yeah,
let's
timebox
this,
could
we,
let's
just
bring
this
discussion
to
get
her,
because
maybe
even
more
voices
can
bring
more
clarity
to
some
of
this
as
Louise's
question.
A
A
A
I
I
A
I
I
F
A
D
I
I
think
that
one
might
be
something
we
want
to
try
for
this
one
in
timestamps
I
think
you
need
a
hold
off
the
other
side,
see
what
stateless
needs
for
the
validated
contracts,
but
I
think
the
time
stamp
is
and
I
was
hoping
that
I'm
Jason
Carver
would
have
been
on
here.
So
we
could
discuss
what
his
issues
are.
I
think
there's
some
conflicting
concerns
with
the
binary
searches
and
the
multiple
blocks
going
back
again
that
some
details
need
to
get
hashed
out
implementation
wise.
I
A
M
M
You
know
it's
almost
like
a
given
right
now
and
and
personally
I'm
a
bit
concerned
by
that,
because
you
know
we
it's
not
one.
We've
discussed
much
on
this
call
so
I'm
curious.
If
people
have
any
updates
or
opinions
or
thoughts,
they
want
to
share
about
that
and
and
I
think
on
the
last
call.
They
said
they
would
have
to
go
over
to
upgrades
so
especially
given
that
yeah.
I
M
A
D
They
they
made
it.
So
it's
one
fork,
but
then
has
two
activations,
but
it
you
don't
need
to
happen
so
they
they.
So
it
wouldn't
be
like
a
multiple.
You
need
multiple
force
implemented.
They've
changed
at
where,
for
me,
this,
the
the
more
complex
something
is
an
ecosystem.
The
longer
I
think
it
should
be
on
a
test
net
and
so
I,
don't
normally
six
weeks.
M
So
here's
a
really
controversial
proposal
should
we
say
that
we
have
the
Berlin
upgrade,
which
has
you
know
the
three
eeap's
we
just
mentioned?
Is
there
a
scenario
where
we
can
have
Berlin
like
have
that
1559
go
live
on
rats
then
either
wit,
Berlin
or
shortly
after
so
that
we
get.
You
know,
however,
much
time
we
need
planning
the
next
upgrade
of
des
that
data
on
it
yeah
because
and
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
that
otherwise
you
know
if
we're
always,
if
we're
always
gonna
need
more
time
on
test
net.
M
For
that
EEP,
then
we're
gonna
either
delay
an
entire
upgrade.
Because
of
that
or
have
or
the
other
alternative
is
we
just
have
a
one
fort
one
eat
fork
on
a
test?
That's
the
try
it
out
but
yeah.
If
it's
in
a
spots
where
it
could
go,
live
on
the
test
that
sooner
than
rather
than
later,
maybe
it
makes
sense
to
do
that
all
at
the
same
time
or
very
close
to
each
other.
I
So
my
concern,
if
there's
a
risk
that
we're
gonna,
significantly
change
the
AP
after
we
go
on
Rosten,
maybe
Robson's,
not
the
right
Testament.
Maybe
we
should
spit
up
a
New
Testament
just
for
fee
market,
and
the
problem
is
spitting
up.
A
new
test.
Nut
is
getting
insufficient
smart
contract
traffic
to
get
people
to
use
it.
So
that's
I
like
the
idea
of
separating
it
from
Berlin
and
finally
giving
it's
on
the
fork.
I
A
O
Will
in
the
future,
I'd
have
to
double
check
to
see
what
our
current
future
studies,
but
that's
definitely
something.
We've
been
thinking
about
actively
and
and
kind
of
trying
to
integrate
into
the
platform
cool.
That's
know
that
happens,
yeah
I'll
double
check
with
Zach
and
see
where
we're
at
on
that
great.
A
Thank
you,
okay,
we're
out
of
time
so
we'll
think
about
this.
More
probably
talk
about
it
on
getter,
one
thing
that
I
feel
bad
that
we
didn't
get
to.
Let
me
find
it
real
quick.
If
I
can
here,
we
are
the
open,
our
RPC
standards
that
Zach
came
on
for
sorry,
we
didn't
get
to
that
that'll
be
at
the
top
of
our
list
next
time.
But
if
you
do
want
30
seconds
to
just
say
what
what
you
want
to
talk
about,
so
people
could
start
thinking
about
it.
That'd
be
cool
yeah.
K
For
sure,
thanks,
Hudson
yeah,
so
as
you
mentioned,
about
open
RPC
I
just
wanted
to
address
any
questions
and
concerns
that
you
guys
had
brought
up
in
your
previous
call,
maybe
clarify
what
open
RPC
is
what
open
RPC
open
our
PC
isn't,
but
since
I
only
have
about
10
seconds,
I'd
suggest
just
having
a
look
at
what
we
have
that
open,
RPC
org
and
that's
probably
a
good
place
to
start.
But
the
general
idea
is
that
we're
building
a
service
specification
language
based
around
JSON
RPC
yeah,
so
thanks
anyways.
K
A
A
A
M
D
A
Great,
so
there's
a
link
to
that
at
agenda
item
4,
4.1
I,
guess
our
four
point
I
for
people
if
they
could
look
and
add
comments
to
that,
there's
also
an
e
IP
IP
meeting
next
Wednesday.
We
think
again,
if
you
want
to
be
added
to
that
reach
out
to
me,
I
can
add
you
to
the
telegram
chat
that
has
the
zoom
link
I.
Think
it's
like
an
hour
to
after
the
meeting
time
that
this
usually
is
it's
like
1500
UTC
on
every
other
Wednesday,
and
this
third
one
is
this
upcoming
Wednesday?