On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:49 PM, Wladimir <laa...@gmail.com> wrote: > Fully agreed about payment protocol, autotools and Qt5 build. > > I'm still not very excited about coin control (and last time I looked at the > code, it has an issue that it introduced statefulness into the wallet model > - a bane for concurrency. But that may be resolved?) . Anyway, many people > seem to want that so it's fine with me, given that the issues are fixed.
As far as I can see, that state is gone, and is now passed in a separate object to the transaction-creation methods. I'd like to see it go in, as I believe it can be helpful in understanding the difference between the high-level abstraction (wallet) and the underlying implementation (individual coins) - something that many people are confused about. I think that's even a more important advantage than the ability for micro-management it offers. Multiwallet would be more appropriate for avoiding linkage between identities, but it seems there's little progress on that front now. -- Pieter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite! It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production. Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48897031&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
