Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.170 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.170; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f170.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <54A2D1F4.9050306@certimix.com>
References: <54A1A99E.1020604@certimix.com>
	<CAAS2fgSvq_Tnon1C+xED06VYPizj+XTiDu0xm0MvCg_9-ejcjA@mail.gmail.com>
	<54A2D1F4.9050306@certimix.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 18:28:54 +0000
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgRxysRqkSxqbF8Y9u2ptfVjX0PU6W85jD-RjSn9hUqNBA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Sergio Lerner <sergiolerner@certimix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: bitcoin-development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP: Voluntary deposit bonds
Precedence: list

On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Sergio Lerner
<sergiolerner@certimix.com> wrote:
> Slight off-topic:
> That looks like an abuse of the VM. Even P2SH is an abuse of the VM.
> Gavin's OP_EVAL (hard-fork) should had been chosen. I'm taking about a
> simple change that goes along the lines of Satoshi's original design.
> Bitcoin was a beautiful design, and extra complexity is making it ugly.
> We need Bitcoin to be simple to understand for new programmers so they
> can keep the project going. It doesn't help the project that one needs
> to be a guru to code for Bitcoin.

Sergio there is no "abuse" there,  OP_NOP3 in that case would be
redefined to OP_COINBASE_FOO_CONSISTENCY.

(I say FOO because it's not clear what rule you actually hope to apply there.)

What you suggested has no purpose by itself: it would need an
additional change which overlays functionality in order to actually do
something. Such a change would likely be "ugly"-- it's easy to be
elegant when you do nothing.