Author: Jorge Timón 2015-05-13 00:38:44
Published on: 2015-05-13T00:38:44+00:00
The author of this message is in favor of using negative numbers for the RCLTV instead of the current proposal, as it would not require larger scripts. However, the author acknowledges that there may be problems that need to be solved before this approach can be implemented. They suggest deploying the initial CLTV now and deciding later whether to reuse it with negatives or use an independent operation.Another participant in the conversation points out that implementing RCLTV as a negative CLTV could make handling the year 2038 problem more complex, and that the current codebase specifically fails on negative arguments to avoid ambiguity. The conversation ends with a link to a Bitcoin-development mailing list.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T19:29:02.292226+00:00