►
From YouTube: Ethereum Core Devs Meeting #10 [2/10/17]
A
Well,
yeah
I'll
just
get
started
on
the
first
bullet
point.
So
yeah
we
just
went
through
the
eip
overhaul
process.
What
that
entails
is
putting
together
a
new
VIP
one
so
that
so
that
is
already
in
place
of
what
right.
Now
we
have
it
so
that
you
have
to
go
to
the
issues.
If
you
want
to
discuss
your
VIP
and
then
once
it's
kind
of
formalized
and
you
got
everything
flushed
out
and
get
some,
you
know,
community.
A
B
A
Right
so
yeah
Greg
I'm
talking
about
the
new
VIP
process,
I'm,
sorry
there
we
go.
You
go
from
issue
to
a
PR
and
with
that
PR
we
have
a
new
set
of
erection,
I,
guess
or
refined
set
of
template
to
use
on
that
we're
going
to
be
clearing
out
all
cheese,
so
so
yeah,
that's
kind
of
in
process,
all
the
other
informations
on
there.
If
you
have
an
EIP,
please
go
to
your
VIP
and
convert
it
to
a
PR
or
close
out
the
issues
which
ever
one
applies
to
you.
So
you
are
already.
A
E
A
A
A
A
A
first
of
eight
editors,
myself,
Nick
kc
d
trio,
gap,
Roman,
italic
and
I-
believe
there
might
be
Greg
as
well
I'm,
right,
yeah
and
then
there's
like
one
or
two
others,
but
I
think
maybe
Christian
so
yeah
the
editors
go
through
and
what
consensus
is
met.
We
will
merge
it
right
now,
there's
kind
of
a
backlog,
that's
going
to
be
a
little
bit
slow
at
first,
but
we're
working
on
the
etherion
package
manager
just
because
that
was
already
mostly
written
up
by
piper.
A
A
Cool
yeah
how
these
meetings
go
down.
We
just
go
through
the
agenda,
which
I
will
paste
you
in
github
or
sorry
get
ur,
and
we
kind
of
try
to
come
to
consensus
amongst
our
different
development
groups
about
what
changes
are
going
to
happen.
The
teacher
just
kind
of
have
a
sync
up,
so
any
comments
you
can
provide
would
be
great
and
there'll
be
plenty
of
opportunity
for
that,
and
if
you
have
an
agenda
item
at
the
end
feel
free
to
let
us
know,
and
we
can
tack
it
on.
Okay
sure
thing
alright.
A
H
Thanks
so
I
did
not
convert
these
two
to
pull
request
yet,
but
I
updated
the
issue
description
to
the
pull
request,
template
the
main
changes
or
yeah
yeah.
The
main
change
between
the
last
version
were
that
addresses
are
62
or
sorry.
I
click
a
link-
and
it
brought
me
to
the
writer
case,
but
it's
too
it's
too
yeah
peace
and
the
first
one
is
196,
which
is
additional
scalar
multiplication
and
then
197
I
guess,
which
is
the
parent
function
right?
Okay,
Stu
agenda
items:
they
are
just
incorrectly
link.
H
H
I
H
I
H
H
H
I
H
So
I
think
you're
telling
those
more
details
about
that,
but
I
think
once
you
fix
the
curve,
then
the
complexity
is
more
or
less
fixed.
Give
the
at
least
to
the
main.
The
main
computational
unit
you
have
is
this
Miller
loop
and
the
number
of
iterations
there
is
is
founded
depending
on
the
actual
cookies.
A
So
it
sounds
like:
is
there
any?
If
there's
not
any
other
comments
on
that?
It
sounds
like
this
is
going
to
go
into
the
process
of
normalization.
Now
there
shouldn't
be
much
of
an
issue
is
consensus,
but
we
might
check
outside
of
an
all
core
dev
meeting.
Just
for
the
final,
you
know
kind
of
getting
the
thumbs
up
for
most
people
about
that
is
that
sounded
Christian
yep.
A
Oh,
that
I
was
actually
talking
about
the
PR,
but
on
the
topic
of
the
yellow
paper
that
will
need
to
be
something
we
work
out
because
there's
a
lot
of
open,
Polar
question
there
and
right
now,
I
know.
Yo
Ichi
has
been
working
to
kind
of
clean
that
up,
but
there's
also
things
that
are
not
updated
from
spurious
dragons.
So
it's
kind
of
a
question
of
do
we
update
the
yellow
paper
hooting
stuff
dated
and
that
and
that
kind
of
thing,
but
in
the
hill,
then
I
guess
we
would
be
easing.
H
J
A
F
H
H
A
A
H
H
A
Great
and
then
Martin
and
chat
talked
about
how
one
of
these
items
is
now
they
went
from
like
142,
196
I
think
the
VIP
members
are
generally
going
to
say
the
same
as
the
issue
number.
Unless
the
author
wants
to
do
it,
otherwise,
so
it
kind
of
goes
in
the
flux.
So,
if
there's
a
weird
PR
number,
just
look
for
a
reference
to
the
issue.
Number
yeah
next
on
the
agenda
is
city
metropolis.
A
E
L
H
H
D
H
H
So,
basically,
the
easy
compromise
proposal
was
to
keep
the
old
semantics
unless
the
size
of
the
return
area
specified
has
a
special
value
which
could
be
2
to
the
2
56
minus
one
or
two
to
the
64
minus
one.
Something
like
that,
and
only
in
that
case
apply
these
special
rules
where
memory
is
enlarged
twice
and
the
enlargement
for
the
return
value
is
charged
to
the
Kali.
What
are
the
opinions
on
that
proposal?
What's.
D
H
You
know
for
a
fact
whether
the
call
of
code
will
fail
or
not
before
you
execute
the
electrical
and
I
mean
in
a
way.
It
is
also
kind
of
protects.
The
caller
come
because
if
the
corner
does
not
specify
an
effective
upper
bound,
so
just
a
gigantic
value,
then
the
colleague
can
make
the
ultra
call
sale
and
make
you
out
of
gas
and.
D
D
D
Finger
look:
could
we
not
do
that?
Actually,
I
mean
if
we
just
said
that
my
friend
Arthur
always
gets
you.
You
know
the
trend,
data
Richard,
a
saline,
let
you
access
all
the
return
data
and
the
amount
of
memory
you
provide
in
the
coop
code.
This
will
fill
up
to
that
much.
Their
new
code
could
simply
sit
back
to
zero
all
the
time
and
use
return.
Data.
H
D
C
B
H
L
B
D
L
H
L
H
O
P
D
D
O
O
The
basic
reasoning
behind
this
is
so
that
you
can
use
this
as
a
kind
of
a
type
of
transaction
where
the
what's
meant
to
be
the
account
instead
actually
is
the
destination
of
the
transaction.
So
the
idea
that
the
transaction
would
go
to
an
accounts
in
that
account
would
actually
be
a
book
in
realistic
use
cases,
a
forwarding
contracts
which
would
basically
check
that
the
transaction
data
for
a
signature
and
if
everything
passes,
then
it
was
either
a
cast,
the
message
alone
or,
in
some
cases,
do
something
to
do
other
things.
O
In
the
mean
this
has
a
few
goals.
One
of
those
goals
is
to
kind
of
do
abstract.
The
way
account
security,
one
of
them,
is
to
abstract
away
yet
I,
always
partially
abstract
the
way
nonsense.
A
third
one
is
to
allow
contracts
to
pay
for
gas.
So,
in
order
for
this
to
work
well,
there
are
kind
of
three
things
or,
as
we
just
covered
in
league
bread
for
things.
O
You
would
say
with
that
particular
piece
of
code
and
people
could
send
either
to
it
or
do
whatever
or
send
whatever
other
tokens
to
us,
and
whenever
you
want
to
start
using
that
account,
you
can
buy
basically
creating
sending
a
contract
creation
transaction
which
creates
that
particular
account
and
the
only
kind
of
the
only
account
you
can
create
at
that
particular
address
en
aquel.
That
has
the
exact
same
piece
of
code
now
for
backwards
compatibility
purposes.
O
Look
this
was
debated
in
the
previous
discussion
in
like
previous
calls,
and
people
seem
to
most
in
favor
of
basically
creating
a
new
op
code,
which
could
be
I
mean
I
use,
create
p2s
age,
for
you
can
rename
it.
So
I
create
what
creates
a
with
code
address
or
whatever,
and
that
would
basically
apply
the
same
principle
to
our
contract
creation
transactions.
O
Now
there's
in
order
for
this
Celeste
in
protocol,
then
there's
also
extra
protocol
stuff.
The
nice
thing
about
the
extra
protocol
stuff
is
that
it's
like
it's
not
critical.
It's
not
consensus
and
it's
not
critical
path,
and
so
we
can
see
erratically
implemented
like
a
month
or
two
after
the
hard
fork
and
narrow
we
find,
and
that
basically
is
logic
in
the
minor
and
logic.
O
In
any
know,
the
does
transaction
propagation
that
would
basically
skin
for
specific
psychic,
but
come
up
with
a
set
of
rules
that
say
if
the
transaction
passes
at
least
one
of
these
rules
and
it
can
be
iterated,
be
propagated
or
I
can
be
included
and
like
the
rules,
one
simple
rule,
as
those
who
subscribed
in
the
comments
would
be
to
check
for
a
redneck.
That
would
basically
say
this
account.
This
transaction
goes
to
a
particular
type
of
accounts,
which
is
guarantees
to
pay
it
only
some
feet
to
the
liner.
L
K
O
L
E
O
D
E
H
K
O
Your
liner
to
receive
an
EAP
86
transaction
and
that
exe
86
transaction
helps
them
to
address
right.
So,
okay,
when
you
would
do
is
you
would
basically
run
a
red
X
on
the
code
of
the
to
address
and
you
would
determine
whether
or
not
it
matches
what
one
particular
preset
pattern
that
would
determine
that
a
ton
of
safety
pin
medicine
and
that
that
transaction
is
actually
going
to
pay
you
or
click
your
fee.
H
D
K
O
No,
no
so
the
rag
XP
is
a
rule.
Is
a
minor
strategy
rule
right,
so
the
ideas
that
would
be
like
at
some
point
after
the
fork,
you
would
release
a
version
of
the
mug
for
anyone
on
a
client
that
gets
used
for
mine
by
miners.
Would
a
demon
like
at
least
one
or
two
red
X
that
would
in
these
were
basically
identify?
You
know,
pieces
of
code
that
are
kind
of
okay
for
the
like
way
to
be
profitable
for
the
minor
to
include
and.
K
O
No,
so
the
red
X
would
be
strict
enough
such
that
you
can
prove
that
any
code
that
matches
it
would
decode
that.
Basically,
if
and
if
that,
if
the
account
has
enough
money
to
pay
for
it
and
if
fisting
and
if
the
signature
is
valid,
then
the
trendex,
the
transaction,
would
actually
take
money
out
of
that
accounts
and
give
that
money
to
the
minor.
Oh
sorry,.
J
J
K
So
I
have
you
know
some
sort
of
proposition
to
maybe
add
to
the
CIP
and
then
tell
me
if
it's
reasonable
and
if,
for
example,
offices
that
are
not
identified
by
this
project,
but
they
are
there
I,
they
have
a
value.
So
it's
very
hard
to
accuse
them
play.
You
know
if
the
valleys
large
enough,
and
so
maybe
because
ursus
can
be
also
passed
into
the
contract
and
it
and
you
know
it
can.
O
Be
valuable
in
some
a
very
famous
case,
so
I
think.
The
important
thing
to
keep
in
mind
is
that
once
EIT
86
is
implemented,
but
we
can.
We
can
definitely
keep
on
coming
up
with
more
and
more
reg
ex
to
capture
more
and
more
classes
of
contracts.
That
are
our
case
for
minors.
To
include
and
minor,
is
what
are
going
to.
Piss
are
free
to
kind
of
add
new
reg
ex
unilaterally
and
oh
no.
K
O
O
O
Another
input
is
the
balance
of
the
two
address
to
make
sure
it
has
enough
money
and
the
30
and
40
is
the
data
of
the
transaction
and
the
reason
it
needs
the
data
or
the
transaction
is
to
let
it
can
tell
whether
or
not
the
fee
of
high
enough
and
whether
or
not
the
signatures
valid.
Now.
Theoretically,
of
course,
you
could
you
could
have
sent.
These
rules
could
potentially
be
like
arbitrary.
K
Well
sounds
interesting:
damn,
ok,
I
guess.
The
way
we
should
be
you
know
make.
This
is
common
thread,
BJP,
more
active,
I!
Guess
these
questions
are
read,
it
seem
still
a
little
bit
there.
You
will
shake
it
for
me
about
the
air
and
it
jumped
in
details.
I
don't
want
to
take
all
the
time
of
everybody.
So
I
will.
C
H
O
O
Theoretically,
a
malicious
miner
could
include
one
of
these
transactions,
but
it
would
just
go
the
include
process
according
to
the
consensus
rules
and
the
Wii
U
is
the
same
like
the
same
space
s
methodology
that
we've
used
for
two
years,
and
it
shouldn't
really
be
a
big
issue
right,
like
his
face
pic
with
just
a
fairly
small
extension
to
with
the
signature
scheme
zia.
Anyone.
L
O
Now,
if
I
mean
in
terms
of
actually
testing
to
these
expressions,
one
thing
that
we
could
do
a
later
on
is
that
what
wants
to
be
VIP
is
that
we
step
woman
once
the
fourth
is
done
on
the
test,
that
and
on
the
main
nest,
then,
on
the
test
net,
we
can
probably
start
letting
some
clients
and
have
certain
some
of
these
rag
up
excellent,
and
you
know
that
will
be
a
separate
process.
So
it's
important.
L
L
O
O
L
M
O
Think
I
mean
I
personally
say
this
is
one
of
the
probably
one
of
the
higher.
My
preference
would
be
to
try
to
put
it
into
into
metropolis,
and
we
need
one
of
the
reasons
why
I
say
this
is
just
because
of
complementarity
with
the
guys
be
a
stark
applications
but
and
alongside
it's
also
one
that
just
has
a
purely
kind
of
high
trade
off
of
you
value
to
implementation
costs,
but
thats
soon.
D
C
O
O
L
O
H
Yes,
something
perhaps
that
should
be
talk
a
bit
more
about
in
the
issue,
so
I
mean
with
with
that
abstraction
we
can't
have
an
ordering
of
was
actually
more
because
if
I
mean
the
contract
can
check
the
loans.
But
then
the
transaction
will
be
executed,
just
won't
have
any
effect,
but
it
will
consume
yet
so
can't.
Basically,
you
can't
put
out
a
keyword.
Projection
movie
then
executed
in
order,
which
is
probably
also
a
good
thing,
because
it
confused
resources
in
the
in
the
minors
and
clients
that
aren't
tasteful.
H
O
Right
well,
we,
unless
that
sound
that
sounds
highly
dependent
on
minor
strategy,
is
like
it.
You
could
potentially
have
like
miners
tabare,
guess
that
check
for
a
specific
type
of
account,
but
has
a
non
scheme,
in
which
case
you
can
keep
an
order
or
you
could
ask
for
a
gag
for
some
different
non
scheme
that
might
not
require
in
order
or
you
might
have
a
red,
X
4
sub
UT
XO
scheme.
So
it's
like
it's
in
the
longer
term,
it
seems
situation
dependent
sure,
but.
O
So,
look
from
the
from
the
point
of
view
of
kind
of
reeling
information
about
the
effect
of
transactions.
The
two
new
things
would
be
that
number
one.
Theoretically,
a
transaction
can
be
included,
as
can
be
included
twice
and,
and
so
you
have
to
look
at
you
just
basically
have
a
look
at
a
lawyer.
Yes,
you
have
to
make
sure
they're
trying
to
actually
made
at
the
log
if
you
wanted
to
check
that
it
actually
did
something
all.
H
H
O
O
L
I
O
O
But
if
we
were,
if
we
were
to
try
and
stretch
it
that
much
further
back,
then
it
would
require
even
more
infrastructure
in
order
to
be
able
to
actually
fetch
these
hashes
quickly
enough.
So
the
intention
here
basically
is
that
we
would
store
some
number
of
wat
caches
in
the
states
and
the
block
a
shop
code
would
be
a
kind
of
redirected
to
read
this.
Basically
look
at
what
the
contract
says.
It's
at
the
same
time,
because
the
contract
that
stores
these
days,
these
state
routes,
or
so
these
black
hashes,
would
also
have
a
function.
O
It's
more
it's
more
intent,
Adele,
so
as
a
kind
of
a
longer-term
feature
in
order
to
allow
us
in
order
for
things
like
Casper
Casper,
a
future
changes
to
the
consensus
algorithm
via
more
capable
of
kind
of
evaluating
things
from
inside
of
the
EVM.
But
it's
also
something
like
some
applications
might
I
just
decide
that
they
could
benefit
from
and
it's
fairly
a
relatively
easy
to
implement.
So
the
idea
is
that
this
basic
with
or
the
apparel
mechanism,
that
does
the
exact
same
thing.
O
O
In
order
for
like
lines
to
like
actually
properly
be
to
have
the
full
like
lion
security,
it
technically
still
has
to
validate
the
entire
chain,
but
because,
with
this
mechanism,
you
would
have
an
automatic
kind
of
mechanism
by
which
blocks
would
points
table
with
the
rectory
points,
two
blocks
that
are
clear,
like
50,000
blocks
before
them.
This
would
allow
white
clients
to
kind
of
verify
a
partial
chain
that
skip
that
I'm
going
to
skip
10,000
blocks
at
a
time
and
you
basically
be
able
to
have
like
potentially
even
higher
sinking.
O
G
O
O
You
would
have
one
mechanism
that
stores
the
last
two
fifty
six
blocks.
Then
you
would
have
enough
to
another
mechanism
that
stores
the
last
6
15,
the
every
256
block
for
the
last
two
fifty
six
blocks,
and
then
you
have
a
mechanism
to
stores
every
256
square
blocks
for
the
last
up
to
two
to
six,
cubes
and
so
forth.
O
So
the
idea
would
be
like
you
would
kind
of
have
several
copies
of
the
same
mechanism
except
they
would
have
kind
of
different
levels
of
frequency
and
dip
at
the
same
time
go
further
back,
so
a
block
individual
block
ashes
would
only
be
accessible
within
within
a
fairly
short
frame.
But
if
you're
willing
to
restrict
yourself
to
block
numbers
that
are
specific
multiple,
then
you
could
go
back,
go
back
much
further,
so
the
it's
theoretically,
it's
actually
not
that
much
more
difficult
to
code
up
the.
O
O
The
two
are
equal
in
complexity,
because
the
goals,
what
the
goal
would
be
a
bad
set
from
the
point
of
view
of
consensus
code,
what
you
would
actually
be
doing
if
you
would
be
doing
a
call
to
a
contract
and
it
would
be
contract
code,
that's
running
the
logic
and
the
contract
code.
When
you
need
that,
you
would
only
need
to
be
written.
One.
G
You
spoke
about
like
a
very
fast
sort
of
initial
sync
mechanism,
where
we
would
be
able
to
just
go
backwards
very
quickly
by
just
giving
the
whole
bash.
That's
included,
yeah
porridge,
not,
but
if
we're
starting
from
some
header
wishes
entirely
disconnected
from
the
Genesis,
then
that
attacker
could
just
put
in
fakeblock
ashes
fake
state
routes.
We
still
have
to
walk
backwards,
to
verify
the
proof
of
works
for
all
of
those
individual
blocks
to
the
Genesis
3.
O
O
So
the
goal
would
be
like
you
would
kind
of
try
and
find
a
chain
containing
all
of
the
high
all
of
the
kind
of
high
high
difficulty
blocks.
If
you
would
use
that
as
kind
of
probabilistic
proof
to
show
no,
this
is
the
cheat.
This
is
a
chain
that
I
actually
had
a
lot
of
people
doing
stuff
on
it.
Interesting.
G
O
Yeah,
let's
see
ya
the
Belize
that
I'd
even
see
it
is
that
I
think
you
might.
We
need
to
meet
to
prove
the
correctness
of
what
may
be
10
or
20
key
stone
blocks.
So
it
is
basically
the
algorithm
on
the
server
side
would
be
is
step
one
scan
through
the
entire
chain
steps
to
find
the
10
or
20
blocks
to
satisfy
a
difficulty
threshold
100
sign
100,000
times
higher
than
normal.
Then
step
3
use
this
kind
of
block
hash
blinking
mechanism
to
prove
a
hash
link
pass
from
each
one.
O
Each
one
of
these
super
blocks
to
the
previous,
and
then
you
would
just
in
the
mid
ship
it
off
as
a
proof
you'll
like
client
and
the
whole
thing
would
be
maybe
like
five
or
10
kilobytes
along
and
the
one
well.
Let
me
find
maybe
like
10
10
to
50
kilobytes
and
the
like
line
would
be
able
to
just
kind
of
voice
through
it.
Probably
in
a
few
seconds.
D
O
O
It
would
end
up
earning
something
like
14th
or
every
three
seconds,
and
now
that
that's
the
case,
if
you
have
a
perfect
cartel,
but
if
you
have
even
a
single
line
or
a
single
mining
pool
that
has
more
than
about
twenty
percent
of
hash
power,
then
you
actually
have
incentive
to
do
a
kind
of
weaker
version
of
the
strategy
to
increase
revenue.
So
I
mean
the
solution.
Here.
O
Maybe
seventy
percent
of
seventy-five
percent
of
the
benefit.
But
the
nice
thing
about
this
is
that
the
loop,
the
challenge
was
to
uncle,
was
treating
one
uncle
in
cubicles.
As
being
separate,
saying
is
video
said
you
can't
with
you
can't
extract
that
information
from
the
blog
header
confessing
the
blockade.
O
D
O
I
mean
it
sounds
as
it
sounds
as
though
the
decision
is
that
people
want
me
to
kind
of
write
up
the
basically
rear
up
right
off
the
version
that
have
that
kind
of
gold
goes
back
further
in
history
with
with
decreasing
frequencies
and
right
up
the
e
ikea
for
the
yell,
like
line
algorithm
and
then
discuss
it
again
next
time
around.
Okay,
you
have.
J
O
O
Q
D
D
H
M
O
O
N
O
Scalar
multiplication
now
that
should
also
be
a
constant
archery.
Oh
I,
see,
because
what
what
so?
My
opinion
is
that
I
don't
really
see
many
use
cases
in
practice
for
scalars,
where
the
expected
ask
the
value
of
it.
Absolute
value
of
a
scalars
was
much
less
than
pure
latuda
series,
so
I
just
say
make
it
a
constant
that
depends
on
the
maximum.
O
N
O
O
Is
a
county
auction
to
grow
up
the
gas
costs
and
we
spent
a
bit
of
time
arguing
and
since
the
last
time
the
formula
was
slightly
updated
so
that
basically
it's
the
floor
of
the
max
of
maxim
of
the
length
of
the
modulus
in
the
life
of
the
base
or
well.
Basically,
the
takes
a
maximum
of
the
likes
of
the
modulus
in
the
length
of
the
base
square.
That
and
multiply
that
by
the
length
of
the
exponents
with
a
minimum
of
one
it's
a
like.
O
D
O
Hold
on
all
rights,
32
bits,
I'm,
income,
I'm
inclined
to
say
making
the
lengthy
old
32
bytes
instead
of
32
bits.
Basically,
because,
like
that's
the
way
that
the
existing
ABI
worse
and
there's
no
reason
not
the
stick
device
and
I
would
even
argue
me
here.
This
will
be
more
annoying
because
it's
actually
more
difficult
to
construct
32
bits
in
EDM
that
it
is
to
construct
courage
or
is
more
complex
to
pack
32
bits
and
as
the
factory
device
Kurt.
So
you
know
I'm
inclined
to
kind
of
stick
to
a
bi
style,
I.
D
J
D
D
O
This
is
basically
the
kind
of
updated
version
of
Yeti
140,
whereas
I
understand
the
main
changes
that
instead
of
the
revert,
instead
of
like
it,
providing
an
error
code
as
a
stack
argument,
it
was
it
would
provide
error
information
encoded
in
Vice.
That
would
be
returned
in
the
same
way
that
the
correct
that
called
data
for
that
right
or
return
out
what
would
be
returned.
O
D
More
or
less
the
idea,
although
it
with
some
disagreement
in
the
other,
whether
or
not
Cole,
should
return
the
returned,
outer
area
call
fails
or
whether
it
should
be
hunted
for
a
few
job
code,
I'm
personally
family,
the
pinion.
Those
should
return
it
with
one.
You
can
use
Ruby
bad
weather,
some
discussion
and
the
whether
or
not
the
call
opcode
should
return
the
the
value
from
rigored.
If
the
call
fail
or
whether
that
should
be
whether
to.
O
D
O
And
my
instinct
system,
my
instinct
is
the
word
call
me
this
is
to
when
making
calls.
You
is
directly.
My
arguments
are
that
number
one
it
provides
a
nice
symmetry
is
here
as
you
are
between
return
in
reverse,
and
the
of
the
other
arguments
would
be
a
bit
avoids
introducing
you
off
codes,
and
particularly
it
avoids
introducing
kind
of
useful
new
forms
of
temporary
says,
and
but
that's.
O
D
Have
personally
I'm
inclined
to
agree,
I
mean
there's
a
problem
raised.
Is
that
called
and
provide
a
good
way
to
access
the
link
for
the
return
java?
Certainly
from
my
mind,
April,
shoulder
not
sure
whether
it
returns
from
reversion?
Well,
that's
the
problem
we
already
had
and
we
all
get
fixed.
Okay,.
N
D
O
H
O
H
O
O
H
H
H
D
O
J
D
O
O
O
Number
is,
if
your
call
alright
195
I,
think
yep,
okay
yeah,
so
for
pure
calls,
the
main
use
cases
are,
we
will
prefer
static.
Call
the
use
cases
basically
are
that
any
constant
function,
we're
just
you
want
to
fear
easily
provide
an
assurance,
and
it's
not
going
to
do
a
reentry
attack
on
you
and
41
for
pure
call.
The
use
cases
are
you.
One
of
them
is
just
generally
pure
functional
programming,
but
the
second
one
is
Casper
validation,
code,
I'd.
O
O
O
H
H
N
J
C
D
B
D
C
O
All
right
yeah,
so
I
think
the
issue
that
was
brought
up
is
that
like
client
seems
that
might
be,
that
might
have
a
need
to
exit
to
re-execute
a
transaction
in
the
context
in
which
it
was
originally
executed,
and
for
that
reason
they
actually
need
to
have
the
intermediate
state
route.
So
basically
it
like
provides.
So
what
that
means.
They'll
said:
removing
intermediate
state
routes
actually
does
have
that
we
some
cost
so
personally,
I'm
a
bottle
like
anyone's,
don't
give
her
one
so
here
for
you,
yeah.
B
O
So
personally,
I
am
I.
Let's
kind
of
you
know
what's
wrong
a
night
on
Yeti
98,
then
I
was
back
when
I
first
came
up
with
it,
my
main
reasoning,
being
that
I've
realized
that
the
bottle
next
to
scalability,
if
it's
so
much
average
case
performance
as
it
is
worst-case
performance
and
like
even
with
yet
you
know,
even
with
the
IP
98,
what
you
can
still
come
up
with
a
worst-case
like
sigilyph
single
transaction
das.
Attacks
that
would
be
able
to
would
be
is
just
totally
not
paralyzed
able
so.
O
I
O
N
I
do
have
one
I
would
say
agenda
item
just
something
the
way
in
the
go
team.
So
we
saw
that
the
first
began
working
on
the
life
time
for
coffee,
and
actually
there
is
a
parity
life
protocols
back
on
their
webpage,
which
is
kind
of
based
on
the
left.
But
a
bit
modified
and
I
just
wanted
to
draw
them,
bring
it
up
that
perhaps
it
would
be
best
not
to
diverge
the
life-science
protocols,
because
then
we'll
have
a
separate
party
island
and
a
separate
guest
island,
the
network.
G
N
Of
course,
not
all
success,
there
are
hundreds
like
ideas
that
you
guys
are
doing,
so
it
definitely
would
benefit
both
projects
and
the
whole
thing
in
general.
I
just
wanted
to
make
want
to
be
on
the
same
page
that
we
don't
accidentally
dream
up
to
separate
photo
goes
and
then
fight
it
out
between
them.
Rather,
we
should
be
in
for
a
more
constructive
approach.
G
N
G
I
think
the
thing
I'd
really
like
to
see
in
VIP
is
the
v5
discovery
protocol
and
understand
that
guests,
like
client
users
is
already
and
Arkady
and
I
went
over
to
the
office
and
spoke
with
two
looks
about
it
a
couple
months
ago,
and
it
seems
like
a
good
proposal.
I'd
love
to
see
this
VIP
start
getting
that
standardized
and
implemented
in
parity
as
well,
and
that's
definitely
a
big
step
towards
likewise.
N
What
definitely
I
think
Felix
S&S
wanted
to
document
the
whole
thing,
but
I
think
the
problem
was
that
it
was
always
labeled
experimental,
so
they
didn't
want
to
spend
too
much
time
on
it,
but
is
it
appears
to
work
more
or
less
nicely,
I
think
yeah.
We
should
really
put
in
the
effort
to
get
satellites
properly
IP
for
it,
so
I'll
try
to
focus
Felix
and
try
to
convince
him
or
short,
or
maybe
we
can
also
have
any
food
together.
Dic.
N
D
I
D
I
H
N
N
N
If
you
leave
that
eip
proposal
stage,
I
think
there
are
two
competing
derivation
path
being
discussed.
The
missing
the
whole
debate
is
around
adding
an
extra
nesting,
zero
nesting
at
the
end
or
not.
The
letter
uses
one
path
and
certain
wallets
use
an
extra
zero
at
the
end
and
basically
alternative
the
state.
It
would
be
nice
to
kind
of
thrive
on
an
official
fat
because
more
and
more
wallets
for
us
and
more
and
more
clients,
market
internetting,
HD
functionality.
It
will
really
really
screw
with
users.
G
E
N
E
N
F
D
J
F
A
O
It
I
think
to
be
to
be
fair.
That's
still
true!
If
the
smart
object,
if
there's
another
smart,
contrary
watching
and
I
canonicity,
the
first
for
contract,
Bochy's
proof
of
work
and
I'd
also
add
that
if
people
really
want
to
well
boy
who
actually
implemented
etsu
verification,
if
your
aim
already
and
if
you're
away
it
only
takes
about
4.1
million,
guess.