secp256k1 library and Intel cpu

[rico666]

I really wish this forum would sometimes happen to be about an actual technical discussion and not always about who has a bigger dick.

How can that be if it's moderated by a bearded dwarf (with the according dick size) acting out his moderator power fantasies.
I mean look what happened:

I contributed to secp256k1, but then I made the fatal mistake to criticize it and the even more fatal mistake to criticize his holiness Maxwell the 1st.

Immediately I am - according to treebeard extraordinaire - "A wallet thief", "incompetent" and what not.
Plus of course the usual negative trust rating he gives in these cases. Yay - my 1st negative trust rating here ever.

How can you have a technical discussion, if the gnome here is swinging his sceptre. Not benevolently I might add if you happen to not wank his ego.

Then technical discussion happens via PM (thanks AlexGR et al.) or elsewhere and result in non-public solutions.

Yep guys - there you have it: Your glorious core developer deity barring people from bringing their ideas/work in. Sorry, not exact. *Taking their contribution and fuck them over afterwards.* Yep more like it.


Rico

[1714967875]

1714967875

[1714967875]

1714967875

[1714967875]

1714967875

[1714967875]

1714967875

[piotr_n]

You are not a wallet thief, man - you've done nothing wrong in that matters.
I am also not a wallet thief, even though the man has also somehow accused me of such.

We are all dicks though.

If I was to be upset by all the names that different kind of dicks call me, I'd have been upset all me life.
It's a public forum, people have different characters which are going to clash and you have to know how to deal with it - especially if you are older than them.
But that is not the point.

The point is that I have been here for years and if someone asked me today how I have contributed into an actual "technical development" of bitcoin by my activity on this "Development & Technical Discussion" forum, I'd have said: I haven't at all.
Although I have certainly made my dick bigger here.
And the sad part is that everybody seems to be here for that reason.

[HostFat]

I'm not sure if you will find them better, but on bitco.in/forum has some places for technical discussions. Maybe, or maybe not, you can find other opinions/help about this and other objects.

[Jude Austin]

You are not a wallet thief, man - you've done nothing wrong in that matters.
I am also not a wallet thief, even though the man has also somehow accused me of such.

We are all dicks though.

If I was to be upset by all the names that different kind of dicks call me, I'd have been upset all me life.
It's a public forum, people have different characters which are going to clash and you have to know how to deal with it - especially if you are older than them.
But that is not the point.

The point is that I have been here for years and if someone asked me today how I have contributed into an actual "technical development" of bitcoin by my activity on this "Development & Technical Discussion" forum, I'd have said: I haven't at all.
Although I have certainly made my dick bigger here.
And the sad part is that everybody seems to be here for that reason.

We are all definitely dicks, lol.

 

[mrx23dot]

Hi All,

  What's the current fastest version of secp256k1_fe_mul for i5/i7?
  Currently that's my bottleneck on secp256k1_unsafe lib. Which has the same asm as the official.

One of the ASM in this thread caused segfault for me, the other was slower than the original.

    %   cumulative   self                   self     total           
   time   seconds   seconds          calls  ms/call  ms/call  name   
  46.24      4.67     4.67 235910453     0.00     0.00  secp256k1_fe_mul_inner
  13.71      6.06     1.39 88835758     0.00     0.00  secp256k1_fe_sqr_inner
   10.05      7.07     1.02        2   507.51   507.51  sha256_transf