Bitcoin Forum
September 25, 2017, 10:37:18 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 [87] 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 ... 169 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN][YAC] YACoin ongoing development  (Read 343418 times)
Balthazar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


BTC-e Divine Overlord, ask cryptodevil for details


View Profile WWW
January 13, 2014, 09:58:49 AM
 #1721

Maybe Satoshi need to learn some features from C99/C++0x/boost to write a readable code without portability issues. But it's definately not a crap.

Anyway, I have no problem with understanding a Bitcoin code.

novaco.in | EtherMine.ru (65 GH/s, DGM 0.5%) | EtherDig.Net (6GH/s, PPS 1.5%)
฿: 1QJ8RFiRKsJKmY8ZAjxfCUeBZXmjthK4Pk: 4RgnHWtnJWEyMhqhDdazW3Hdr7cx5ybF6i ETH: 0x5B475Febb3018f41d0Ac3C2f1A864bd102ab5a2E
1506379038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379038
Reply with quote  #2

1506379038
Report to moderator
1506379038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379038
Reply with quote  #2

1506379038
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1506379038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379038
Reply with quote  #2

1506379038
Report to moderator
1506379038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1506379038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1506379038
Reply with quote  #2

1506379038
Report to moderator
sairon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


One does not simply mine Bitcoins


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 10:04:26 AM
 #1722

Maybe Satoshi need to learn some features from C++0x and boost to write readable code without portability issues. But it's definately not a crap.
It's C++11 already.
Oh well, at least it works, somehow...

GPG key ID: 5E4F108A || BTC: 1hoardyponb9AMWhyA28DZb5n5g2bRY8v
Balthazar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


BTC-e Divine Overlord, ask cryptodevil for details


View Profile WWW
January 13, 2014, 10:10:07 AM
 #1723

It's C++11 already.
Bitcoin was written during 2008-2009.

Oh well, at least it works, somehow...
C++11 doesn't work sometimes. Just because there are only a few compilers supports it and this support is still under active development. It's easy to write C++11 code for g++-4.8, which will be impossible to compile with 4.6, for example.

novaco.in | EtherMine.ru (65 GH/s, DGM 0.5%) | EtherDig.Net (6GH/s, PPS 1.5%)
฿: 1QJ8RFiRKsJKmY8ZAjxfCUeBZXmjthK4Pk: 4RgnHWtnJWEyMhqhDdazW3Hdr7cx5ybF6i ETH: 0x5B475Febb3018f41d0Ac3C2f1A864bd102ab5a2E
sairon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


One does not simply mine Bitcoins


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 10:20:20 AM
 #1724

It's C++11 already.
Bitcoin was written during 2008-2009.
Sure it was. Maybe even earlier.
Just saying that C++0x was already standardized (and renamed) as C++11.

Oh well, at least it works, somehow...
C++11 doesn't work sometimes. Just because there are only a few compilers supports it and this support is still under active development. It's easy to write C++11 code for g++-4.8, which will be impossible to compile with 4.6, for example.
I don't see the problem here. g++ 4.8 is already available even for that windoze crap.
BTW, libbitcoin has a much nicer/cleaner codebase. I'd like to see new alts based on that.

GPG key ID: 5E4F108A || BTC: 1hoardyponb9AMWhyA28DZb5n5g2bRY8v
Balthazar
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


BTC-e Divine Overlord, ask cryptodevil for details


View Profile WWW
January 13, 2014, 10:36:34 AM
 #1725

I don't see the problem here. g++ 4.8 is already available even for that windoze crap.
4.8 is purposed for compiler monkeys, it's not for production use until it has no /debian/stable/ packages.

novaco.in | EtherMine.ru (65 GH/s, DGM 0.5%) | EtherDig.Net (6GH/s, PPS 1.5%)
฿: 1QJ8RFiRKsJKmY8ZAjxfCUeBZXmjthK4Pk: 4RgnHWtnJWEyMhqhDdazW3Hdr7cx5ybF6i ETH: 0x5B475Febb3018f41d0Ac3C2f1A864bd102ab5a2E
ilostcoins
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 274



View Profile
January 13, 2014, 12:48:23 PM
 #1726

2 all

Guys, I suppose that you need block hashes caching , this approach would allow you to reduce startup time significantly (30х-100x times at least). This could be done through merging with NVC blockindex code and addition of your network rules.

I think this will resolve all your performance issues.


Good to know there is another point of reference in case performance issue does not entirely clear. Thanks.  Smiley

LTC: LSyqwk4YbhBRtkrUy8NRdKXFoUcgVpu8Qb   NVC: 4HtynfYVyRYo6yM8BTAqyNYwqiucfoPqFW   TAG id: 4313
CMC: CAHrzqveVm9UxGm7PZtT4uj6su4suxKzZv   YAC: Y9m5S7M24sdkjdwxnA9GZpPez6k6EqUjUt
Thirtybird
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 693



View Profile
January 13, 2014, 03:16:31 PM
 #1727

2 all

Guys, I suppose that you need block hashes caching , this approach would allow you to reduce startup time significantly (30х-100x times at least). This could be done through merging with NVC blockindex code and addition of your network rules.

I think this will resolve all your performance issues.


Good to know there is another point of reference in case performance issue does not entirely clear. Thanks.  Smiley

How I see ilostcoins  Grin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Erlw-ODVZxU

YACMiner: https://github.com/Thirtybird/YACMiner  N-Factor information : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aj3vcsuY-JFNdC1ITWJrSG9VeWp6QXppbVgxcm0tbGc&usp=drive_web#gid=0
BTC: 183eSsaxG9y6m2ZhrDhHueoKnZWmbm6jfC  YAC: Y4FKiwKKYGQzcqn3M3u6mJoded6ri1UWHa
uranian
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 09:52:13 PM
 #1728

Somehow during the time that YAC went down around Xmas I managed to send some YAC from cryptsy to an invalid address...anyone know if it's possible to rescue these coins? The transaction shows as unredeemed the blockchain. And apologies if this isn't the right place to post this, I'm assuming that my YAC are MIA, this is something of a last effort.

http://ec2-54-247-145-77.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/tx/d7d2e47942fc5732c37997cfca7aa468bd39d6e20c3fcc3d26171cdb21722e70#o1
sairon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


One does not simply mine Bitcoins


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 09:54:48 PM
 #1729

Somehow during the time that YAC went down around Xmas I managed to send some YAC from cryptsy to an invalid address...anyone know if it's possible to rescue these coins? The transaction shows as unredeemed the blockchain. And apologies if this isn't the right place to post this, I'm assuming that my YAC are MIA, this is something of a last effort.

http://ec2-54-247-145-77.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com/tx/d7d2e47942fc5732c37997cfca7aa468bd39d6e20c3fcc3d26171cdb21722e70#o1
There ain't such thing as an invalid address... Is it your deposit address on some exchange? Your wallet's change address? Someone else's address?

GPG key ID: 5E4F108A || BTC: 1hoardyponb9AMWhyA28DZb5n5g2bRY8v
uranian
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 10:01:27 PM
 #1730

I don't really know how this happened, Sairon. I've got the YAC wallet locally, but my address is different. I'm guessing that the transaction is unredeemed means no-one is using that address. The coins were sent from Cryptsy, but the customer support there is not entirely helpful; they just closed the ticket with an "issue solved!" sort of message.
sairon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


One does not simply mine Bitcoins


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 10:08:10 PM
 #1731

I don't really know how this happened, Sairon. I've got the YAC wallet locally, but my address is different. I'm guessing that the transaction is unredeemed means no-one is using that address. The coins were sent from Cryptsy, but the customer support there is not entirely helpful; they just closed the ticket with an "issue solved!" sort of message.
It only means no one has spent these coins yet. Unless you tend to copy-paste someone else's addresses, I think you have the private key to this address somewhere (or it's an exchange deposit addr).

Double-check all your exchange accounts for deposits of 1371.497218 YAC.

Did you use more wallets? (Do you have more wallet.dat files?) If so, try to find these and see if the coins are there.

You could also try typing "validateaddress Y9MYeV2WcNbYJtMzE9Qs8dgS5yyAyvs9YF" into the debug window of YAC client. If you see something like "ismine: true" - then good news, the key to that address is in your wallet (but the client missed the transaction, somehow).

Other than that, dunno.

GPG key ID: 5E4F108A || BTC: 1hoardyponb9AMWhyA28DZb5n5g2bRY8v
uranian
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 10:49:47 PM
 #1732

No joy. I tried all of your suggestions. Would there be some way to use the "sign message" functionality to see if any (perhaps honest) person has received the coins?
sairon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


One does not simply mine Bitcoins


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 10:56:15 PM
 #1733

No joy. I tried all of your suggestions. Would there be some way to use the "sign message" functionality to see if any (perhaps honest) person has received the coins?
First you need to find that person, though.

GPG key ID: 5E4F108A || BTC: 1hoardyponb9AMWhyA28DZb5n5g2bRY8v
uranian
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 10:59:22 PM
 #1734

So I couldn't just send a YAC to the address and include a message with that transaction? Sorry to be such a newbie.
sairon
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


One does not simply mine Bitcoins


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 11:02:38 PM
 #1735

So I couldn't just send a YAC to the address and include a message with that transaction? Sorry to be such a newbie.
Nope you can't. That's one of the misconceptions that blockchain.info is spreading (un-)intentionally.

GPG key ID: 5E4F108A || BTC: 1hoardyponb9AMWhyA28DZb5n5g2bRY8v
uranian
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 140


View Profile
January 13, 2014, 11:03:37 PM
 #1736

Bugger. Thank you for your help, anyway.
diskodasa
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 141



View Profile
January 15, 2014, 05:38:13 PM
 #1737

So, it's unofficialy dead?

▛ [ CENTRA ] Multi-Blockchain Worldwide Debit Card & Insured Wallet
▞▬▬▬▞▬▬▬▞▬▬▬▞▬▬▬▞▬▬▬▞▬▬▬▚▬▬▬▚▬▬▬▚▬▬▬▚▬▬▬▚▬▬▬▚
▙     FacebookSlackTwitterGithubMediumANN Thread     ▟
Thirtybird
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 693



View Profile
January 15, 2014, 05:54:57 PM
 #1738

So, it's unofficialy dead?

Not sure where you got that idea - just decision making to determine the update being made or setting a time to fork with the changes sairon already proposed.

YACMiner: https://github.com/Thirtybird/YACMiner  N-Factor information : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aj3vcsuY-JFNdC1ITWJrSG9VeWp6QXppbVgxcm0tbGc&usp=drive_web#gid=0
BTC: 183eSsaxG9y6m2ZhrDhHueoKnZWmbm6jfC  YAC: Y4FKiwKKYGQzcqn3M3u6mJoded6ri1UWHa
Beave162
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 698



View Profile
January 15, 2014, 06:54:37 PM
 #1739

Can/should we put this up for a vote? Can a decision ultimately be up to sairon? I'm wondering/anxious on what the next step will be...

YaCoin: YL5kf54wPPXKsXd5T18xCaNkyUsS1DgY7z 
BitCoin: 14PFbLyUdTyxZg3V8hnvj5VXkx3dhthmDj
Thirtybird
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 693



View Profile
January 15, 2014, 07:16:08 PM
 #1740

Can/should we put this up for a vote? Can a decision ultimately be up to sairon? I'm wondering/anxious on what the next step will be...

I wouldn't want to put the pressure on sairon, but I would be willing to let him and Joe_Bauers have the final say.  After the lengthy discussion that was had here, I believe the ramifications of doing nothing outweigh the risk of hard forking to fix chain trust issues.

YACMiner: https://github.com/Thirtybird/YACMiner  N-Factor information : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aj3vcsuY-JFNdC1ITWJrSG9VeWp6QXppbVgxcm0tbGc&usp=drive_web#gid=0
BTC: 183eSsaxG9y6m2ZhrDhHueoKnZWmbm6jfC  YAC: Y4FKiwKKYGQzcqn3M3u6mJoded6ri1UWHa
Pages: « 1 ... 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 [87] 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 ... 169 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!