From a1fb4d11fd7e38599d1889f0a4bf0aead649cd0f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eric Voskuil Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 02:11:33 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] Respond to erroneous claim. --- Comments:BIP-0090.md | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/Comments:BIP-0090.md b/Comments:BIP-0090.md index 24c793d..5b78e46 100644 --- a/Comments:BIP-0090.md +++ b/Comments:BIP-0090.md @@ -13,3 +13,5 @@ It would also be incorrect to consider it a material performance optimization (t BIP 0090 is a straightforward proposal which objectively simplified Bitcoin Core and improved its performance. The above criticism by Voskuil is almost completely non-responsive to the proposal itself, instead choosing to invite a definition argument about "technical debt". --Greg Maxwell, 2017-03-14 + +Maxwell's claim that the criticism is non-responsive to the proposal is incorrect. This proposal is not necessary to achieve the stated performance benefit objective. This is clearly stated above and was explained in detail on bitcoin-dev, and stands unchallenged. A meager amount of cache can achieve the same advantage with little effort or complexity (which has been done). The fact that this proposal "simplified Bitcoin Core" is irrelevant. This is not a Bitcoin Core proposal, it is a Bitcoin proposal. --Eric Voskuil, 2017-03-15