►
From YouTube: Ethereum Core Devs Meeting #20 [7/14/17]
Description
A
B
A
A
A
The
troll
box
is
fine,
okay,
so
yeah
first
item
metropolis,
so
we
were
I've
talked
to
like
the
testing
team.
I've
talked
to
some
of
the
devs,
and
people
are
saying
that
II
I,
P
86,
slash
208,
should
be
should
be
changed
to
two
hard
Forks.
So
I
just
wanted
to
get
everyone's
opinion
on
that,
just
to
see
like
what
everyone
thought
so
I
think,
let's
just
start
with
this
room.
So
what
do
y'all
think.
D
D
D
Thank
you,
and
so
what
what
so
one
particular
way
in
which
I
create
to
a
superior
to
create,
for
example,
is
that
if
you
have
a
contract
on
a
theorem
chain-
and
you
accidentally
send
eg
seats
about
address,
then
I
know
that
doesn't
work
because
EDC
is
not
going
to
support
create,
but
if
it
did,
then
it
would
be
easier
to
like
do
the
Kriya.
It
will
basically
be
easier
to
recreate
the
exact
same
contract
in
on
another
chain.
If
you
wanted
to
well,
that's
a
fairly
small
benefit,
I.
F
A
H
A
D
90
98
shouldn't
be
too
hard,
except
for
like,
as
I
mentioned,
the
testing
just
testing
you
just
in
case
yeah
96.
All
we
need
so
I
wrote
these.
For
that.
You
would
need
the
hunk
of
code
that
you
would
stick
into
the
block.
Cache
contract
and
I
wrote
a
version,
but
then
Nicklin
I
came
in
one
and
said
that
he
could
make
a
better
version
and
I've
been
pretty
much
waiting
for
that
ever
since.
D
C
A
D
A
D
D
C
A
D
C
C
A
A
A
D
Go
through
all
the
okay,
so
86
we're
deferring
96
we
can
do
in
98
is
just
like
removing
a
common
thing
out
of
line
and
then
making
sure
you
pass
tests.
100
I
think
it's
done.
140
is
fine,
196
197
198.
We
think
we
have
tests
for
and
what
is
the
status
of
the
C++
tests
for,
like
all
for
all
three
freaking
files
which
compiles
the
196
once
at
187
188.
This
was
the
elliptic
curve
and
again
stuff.
F
D
F
A
H
D
F
H
D
A
D
A
D
A
Some
gas
estimation
I
believe
it
was
based
on
gas
and
I
believe
Arkadiy
also
did
some
based
on
parity
I'm,
not
sure
it
was
for
that
particular
that
particular
opcode,
but
Martin
said
I'll.
Try
to
consolidate
the
get
benchmarks
for
objects
lighter
on
not
much
need
to
report
since
last
time.
Okay,
so
you
just
run
more
tests
and
then
the
parity
teams
on
a
retreat
and
they
don't
have
any
updates.
H
A
Okay,
I
think,
if
we
get
benchmarks
for
I
think
hasn't
been
discussed
before
that.
If
we
get
benchmarks
for
death
and
parity,
those
are
the
two
primary
ones.
We
can
compare,
compare
I
guess
to
try
to
get
it
as
close
as
possible
and
I
mean.
Would
this
be
something
where
we
could
change
this
on
hard
fork
too?
If
we
find
out
that
it
has
been
miscalculated
or
miss
estimated,
totally?
Okay,
great
okay,
we've
gone
through
the
CIP
list.
Any
other
comments
about
this,
particularly.
F
H
So
Felix
was
working
for
the
last
week
or
so,
together
with
the
c-class
busting,
to
support
all
the
tests
to
it
over
to
go
with
so
that
we
can
actually
run
it
as
part
of
our
CI
infrastructure,
which
entails
rewriting,
but
mostly
all
of
our
consensus
test
infrastructure,
and
it's
mostly
done
I
think
what
they
are
kind
of
ironing
out.
The
quirks
and
thank
fear
are
the
weird
corner
cases
that
are
really
hard
to
deport
over
to
other
projects.
F
A
H
So
basically,
we
have
a
follow
up,
PR
which,
which
we
began
just
to
polish
up
and
even
after
that,
we
decided
to
split
up
the
different
IPS
and
separate
for
requests,
so
we're
currently
working
on
separating
them
and
just
making
sure
that
each
of
them
looks
okay
on
their
own.
As
far
as
I
personally
would
start
merging
already
the
the
finalized,
the
IPS,
but
we
agreed
with
Felix
that
we're
kind
of
waiting
for
tests
to
make
sure
that
it
kind
of
looks
like
it
passes
all
the
tests.
H
A
J
A
F
A
D
She
works
been
shooting
the
accepts.
Just
bad
I
mean
we
did
release
like
PI
aetherium
2.0
a
while
back.
So
it's
more
modernized
and
it's
like
a
cleaned
up
a
bunch
of
tests
as
far
as
they
polluting
metropolis
go,
so
we
basically
just
been
waiting
and
Tulsi
boss
lots
of
testing
out
of
stabilized
more
so
if
they
have
stabilized
enough
much,
we
love
the
thing
they
want
to
wait
for.
A
F
F
A
Okay,
great
is
that
pretty
much
the
end
of
the
pious
app
updates,
yeah
sweet.
No
other
clients
are
in
the
room,
I
don't
like,
so
that
ends
the
updates
from
the
client
team's,
the
other.
So
another
agenda
topic
is
determining
the
gas
price
for
new
op
codes
and
pre
compiles
Martin
left
a
note,
saying:
I'll:
try
to
consolidate
the
gas
benchmarks
for
op
codes
later
on,
not
much
to
report
since
last
time
and
then
Arkadiy
from
parity
said
no
updates,
so
we'll
get
that
information
from
parity
in
the
next
meeting
and
hopefully
compare
metrics.
A
Great
so
the
last
part
review
time
estimate
for
testing
and
release
we've
been
kind
of
going
with
an
August
or
September
like
very
rough
estimate.
Since
we
are
delaying
86
I,
think
that's
gonna
help
either
speed
things
up
or
keep
us
on
track.
It
doesn't
what
have
any
opinions
on
the
timing
of
when
things
should
happen?
I
guess
now
that
we
delayed
86.
F
F
A
H
D
A
A
A
F
A
D
D
C
C
B
C
B
C
A
H
A
C
D
But
in
the
one
term
the
31
bytes
of
pointless
overhead
is
going
to
have
to
be
removed
once
we
add
some
kind
of
proper
network
protocol
compression,
yes
yeah,
which
we
have
to
do
anyway
because,
like
the
gas
schedule
depend
of
assumes
that
we
were
assumed
that
we
had
network
protocol
conversion
since
day.
One
yes,
I,
think
it
won't
entirely
alone,
but
it
will
learn
to
such
at
least.
C
H
And
to
be
honest,
I'm
on
anymore,
so
I
see
the
benefit.
One
of
them
is
that
you
Lions
become
a
bit
simpler.
If
you
don't,
if
they
don't
have
to
care
about
two
different
formats.
On
the
other
hand,
retaining
31
zero
bytes
till
infinity
also
seems
a
bit
wasteful.
Of
course
they
it
will
be
compressed
in
a
database,
and
hopefully
soon
sooner
rather
than
later
it
will
be
compressed
that
twice
to
so
it's
not
such
a
huge
issue.
I,
don't
know
to
be
honest.
I
I
can
see
the
advantages
of
both
and.
C
H
A
A
D
A
A
I
have
too
many
tabs
guys.
I,
don't
know
where
my
agenda
is
oh
here
it
is
okay,
so
oh
yeah!
So
as
far
as
the
time
I
guess,
the
other
thing
that
kind
of
goes
with
this
item
is:
if
we
do
so,
we
are
doing
two
hard
Forks
we're
taking
out
all
of
86
for
the
first
one
and
that's
gonna
go
in
the
second
one.
A
What
and
this
is
super
early,
so
we
don't
have
to
go
into
a
lot
of
detail
in
this,
but
what
other
AIPS
would
we
consider
for
the
second
metropolis
fort,
which,
in
my
opinion,
should
probably
not
be
until
2018
just
with
the
next
few
months
in
us
getting
metropolis
out?
We
can
any
if
anyone
wants
to
do
it
faster,
that's
fine,
but
we'll
be
going
pretty
hard
and
then
there's
Def,
Con
and
stuff,
so
maybe
January
or
February
would
be
ideal
for
the
next
one,
but
any
any
thoughts
on
that
just
initially.
D
Once
we're
once
the
first
hard
fork
looks
like
it's
being
close
to
finalized,
you
can
figure
out
like
exactly
how
much
we
wants
to
do
on
this
next,
one
like
what
and
what
what
it
will
entail.
I
mean
it
would
be
a
pretty
significant
change
to
a
bunch
of
feral
a
little
a
little
bit
structure.
So
it's
worth
thinking
more
about
than
know
what
could
go
along
with.
A
D
D
D
C
A
D
A
C
A
B
F
A
H
D
A
D
A
A
Let's
see,
I
did
a
reddit
thread
the
other
day
where
I
said
DAP
developers.
What
is
the
maximum
time
that
the
block
time
could
be
more
before
it
affects
your
decks
and
I
was
trying
to
aim
for
getting
stuff
like
casino,
DAPs
and
other
ones
that
rely
on
low
block
times.
To
kind
of,
let
me
know
what
you
know:
that's
there
in
production.
What
they're
doing
right
now
and
the
wide
consensus
is
that
most
of
the
DAPs
are
favoring
us
doing
metropolis
right
versus
getting
the
you
know.
A
A
H
C
C
A
A
D
D
D
A
A
A
Other
people
can
stick
around
if
you
want
I'll,
probably
turn
off
the
livestream,
but
yeah
specifically
198
for
the
gas
schedule,
and
then
why
are
we
we're
just
finalizing
96
and
98
with
a
few
different
things
just
making
it
specific
so
yeah,
let's
get
to
that
cool?
If
there's
no
other
comments,
good
meeting
and
just
everyone
who
wants
to
stay
on
the
call
stay
on
the
call
and
we
will
work
through
those
three
di
Peas.