66400+ entries in 0.038s

BingoBoingo: billymg:
The CoC situation is lulzier
than my reading of it yesterday lead me
to believe
diana_coman: I rather
think we'll get
there one day; not yet
though
diana_coman: so far
the FGs are one of
the relatively few
things
that I positively like having
to deal with!
diana_coman: myeah,
that's about
the main current pain from my pov
diana_coman: I can't say
that I see a clear suggestion on how
to solve
that
though
a111: Logged on 2018-10-23 06:19 mircea_popescu: "While
the FG shop has been closed for quite some
time already," asciilifeform
think we should bake a new set ?
lobbesbot: asciilifeform:
The operation succeeded.
diana_coman: not
to mention
that I
think it is actually saner
to have local names for
types used
diana_coman: (I just don't want
to carry about Interfaces.Unsigned_8 everywhere)
diana_coman: asciilifeform, it's like a 1ms internal, perceptible interpreting-slowdown every
time I meet bit/byte
diana_coman: ahaha,
that's
the spirit: when C strikes, go
to
the beachz!
mircea_popescu: aaactually, ill
tell you what i can do : im going
to
teh beach. back
thurs or some shit!
diana_coman: yes; basically Ada makes it easy enough
to not have
to force anything; funny how Ada is in fact *very* accommodating - where it makes sense
to be
mircea_popescu: diana_coman i can see it ; i like octet also, but yeah, can't start forcing
this cultural issue on people. a one line define i guess only reasonable approach at
this point.
diana_coman: ftr I quite like
the neat way in which asciilifeform defined
those basic
types in FFA; however, he went for
the classical
types so byte, nibble ; and I find octet SO much easier
than I'm reluctant
to give it up in my code (though all it
takes is anyway a "subtype Octet is Byte" at
top if Byte definition is
to be adopted)
diana_coman: that being said, names are one
thing, definition of
the
types another: i.e. every packet and project still needs
to define/have defined somewhere
the
types it uses
diana_coman: hm,
theoretically
the byte is standard but
there is
the bit/byte confusion issue and moreover I really find octet easier on brain as it directly points at "it's eight bits!"
diana_coman: on one hand libs on
their own should logically have
their own
types; on
the other hand, when
they are used as part of a bigger project, it makes sense I
think
to make
their
types subtypes - where
they fit/are
the same
diana_coman: mircea_popescu, what would
the style be
there?
a111: Logged on 2018-10-23 04:35 mircea_popescu: every
time we notice same answer is given
to repeated question, we note it down. before, what's
the use ?
mircea_popescu: "While
the FG shop has been closed for quite some
time already," asciilifeform
think we should bake a new set ?
☟︎ a111: Logged on 2018-10-22 22:44 asciilifeform: relatedly, mod6 et al, i suggest abolition of '-verifyall' flag, it should really be permanently welded on, bypassing sig
tests doesn't win ~anyffin in so far as i can
tell
mircea_popescu: sit
there
try
to come up with imaginatioins of future people seems a waste of your
time.
mircea_popescu: every
time we notice same answer is given
to repeated question, we note it down. before, what's
the use ?
☟︎ a111: Logged on 2018-10-23 01:51 mod6: Gotta catch up on l0gz and
the rest. In particular, I'm just about nowhere on my
task of creating answers
to FAQs/Common Questions about
the Foundation itself. I'll be working on
that
this week as a main priority - will post what I have for review/comments/corrections in #trilema by end of weekend.
mircea_popescu: yeah, no,
those don't really happen anymore. even 1s are rare(r).
a111: Logged on 2018-10-22 23:17 asciilifeform:
thinking about it, i can actually conceive of 1 possible constructive use for programmable cements --
testing
the reorg mechanism ( i.e. deliberately steer a node into a dead end chain,
then restart uncemented and see whether it finds its way back properly )
mod6: I can't disagree with
that.
a111: Logged on 2018-10-22 22:44 asciilifeform: relatedly, mod6 et al, i suggest abolition of '-verifyall' flag, it should really be permanently welded on, bypassing sig
tests doesn't win ~anyffin in so far as i can
tell
mod6: Meanwhile... my node is happily eating blocks
to catch back up. On block 64 of 85. Will be a few days yet, I'm certain.
mod6: I've got a pile of
things, really. :D
mod6: The creation of a keccak
trb
tree is still on
the
to-do list; however, one
thing kinda proceeds
that item for me - a review /
testing of keccak implementation. I've never had a chance
to do
that yet, and I
think it's important.
mod6: Anyway, like I said, need
to go back and rewind
the logs a week.
mod6: Oh, my bad,
there was just one. For some reason, I
thought
that I read
there were
two.
mod6: asciilifeform:
thanks for your recent submissions
to
the ML. I'll get
to reviewing
those as soon as I can.
mod6: Gotta catch up on l0gz and
the rest. In particular, I'm just about nowhere on my
task of creating answers
to FAQs/Common Questions about
the Foundation itself. I'll be working on
that
this week as a main priority - will post what I have for review/comments/corrections in #trilema by end of weekend.
☟︎☟︎ mod6: Happy 4th Anniversary
to
The Bitcoin Foundation!
a111: Logged on 2018-10-23 01:37 mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
to be clear, is
the idea "node locked on alt chain while main chain goes on a lot of blocks" or "node on a lengthy orphan chain" ?
mircea_popescu: but
the former happens all
the
time, cuz inexpensive relay failure
mircea_popescu: cuz
the latter indeed doesn't happen, expensive mienr failuire
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
to be clear, is
the idea "node locked on alt chain while main chain goes on a lot of blocks" or "node on a lengthy orphan chain" ?
☟︎ a111: Logged on 2015-07-04 21:58 mircea_popescu: atm
the situation is
that block 363730 is forked. one chain, 6 blocks long, proceeds atop a v2 block.
the current main chain proceeds from 363730 on v3 blocks.
a111: Logged on 2015-07-04 04:03 mircea_popescu: asciilifeform listen, seems
the chain actually forked.