Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1We0WH-0000yV-Hm for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 11:11:45 +0000 Received: from mail-lb0-f169.google.com ([209.85.217.169]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1We0WG-0003ph-7W for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 11:11:45 +0000 Received: by mail-lb0-f169.google.com with SMTP id n15so3899531lbi.28 for ; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 04:11:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=8HkhsEn6K8I/0MZUJl/Jm4IeITi8+3TXOY1/Ed0EoPc=; b=CFkozkxzWetOmOJhJDQdXsFFuqGW+fT+kBhYfXBeIVz4MXgoQebelNd8a4LzXbM60c J9ebEzZvfGeSrjWMPWqYckOv3xbfbfDt/LAgH9u2SqVXtew/gjxNStVkjadl3Tt7mtMv nlwIpsqBa/BW40eLRJXyp6y4Y7x+9AvY8cVno5OTX3nlLUhRWbGbZx9Fa+uC6YjzFoT6 qJNbHzSxO+S3ciO3fuHHXsc0IULJ6cUzeU19kEKkwiew2PODoRjSv0GrvnZdLWNnbaHQ KMIXOSL2WWpXvdx5+UcU8SEQixGXpcnrKKBlbNya7uoeVmg3h6BRxhcMzRpWoz7O3oWA iREw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkmXJY42YCsinYMXRfxfROB4M+Q43Qeie3YAU4hPoxsPexKbtbUIgC2q1ROXI1x29t2gMDb MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.153.11.163 with SMTP id ej3mr9768399lad.17.1398510697518; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 04:11:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.185.4 with HTTP; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 04:11:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [85.59.56.59] In-Reply-To: References: <20140425201403.GA8994@savin> <20140425211426.GD8994@savin> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 13:11:37 +0200 Message-ID: From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jorge_Tim=F3n?= To: Tier Nolan Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. X-Headers-End: 1We0WG-0003ph-7W Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP - Hash Locked Transaction X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 11:11:45 -0000 Does it make sense to implement a generic Policy interface (abstract class) which StandardPolicy extends? Maybe you can then implement a WhitelistPolicy, ReplacebyFeeStandardPolicy, ReplacebyFeeWhitelistPolicy... This would make it simpler for miners to implement their own policies in general. The following functions (maybe more) could become methods of Policy: script IsStandard main IsStandardTx main AcceptToMemoryPool