As discussed in the 2016-07-14 meeting, http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-07-14-19.00.html
Needs an analogous change to BIP141: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/420
As discussed in the 2016-07-14 meeting, http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-07-14-19.00.html
Needs an analogous change to BIP141: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/420
As discussed in the 2016-07-14 meeting,
http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2016/bitcoin-core-dev.2016-07-14-19.00.html
ACK bf70224 (Haven't checked for proper replacement in all places but I imagine check-doc would catch that.)
src/rpc/blockchain.cpp: " "cost" : n (numeric) The block cost\n" src/rpc/mining.cpp: " "currentblockcost": nnn, (numeric) The last block cost\n" src/main.cpp: return state.DoS(100, error("ContextualCheckBlock(): cost limit failed"), REJECT_INVALID, "bad-blk-cost");
etc.
Hmm, what about using the term "blockcost" instead?
@paveljanik yes if you want to change all occurrences, also in variable names, then there is much more code impact.
Bah, changing all occurences of 'cost' to 'weight' is a huge change. I'm also having second thoughts about it. Changing it just in user-facing messages is doable, but yes it also appears in the RPC API, in variable names, in tons of comments. And I suppose those all have to be changed for consistency.
Milestone
0.13.0