💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949798690)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949798769)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949799165)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949799382)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949799552)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949799654)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949799739)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949799852)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949799938)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "Implement BIP 370 PSBTv2":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/21283#discussion_r1949800043)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Automatically repair corrupted metadata with doubled derivation path":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29124#discussion_r1949801025)
Added a constant.

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Automatically repair corrupted metadata with doubled derivation path":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29124#discussion_r1949801147)
Done

💬 achow101 commented on pull request "wallet: Automatically repair corrupted metadata with doubled derivation path":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/29124#discussion_r1949801345)
Done

💬 sipa commented on pull request "feefrac: add support for evaluating at given size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30535#discussion_r1949807125)
Fixed.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "feefrac: add support for evaluating at given size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30535#issuecomment-2649120502)
@instagibbs I incorporated a variant of your commit into the existing `feefrac_mul_div` fuzz test, with the tightest bounds I could make more.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "feefrac: add support for evaluating at given size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30535#discussion_r1949815030)
I think there's also some value in knowing we're not diverging wildly from what already exists if we're planning on swapping functionality later. Agreed on the rest.

💬 sipa commented on pull request "feefrac: add support for evaluating at given size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30535#discussion_r1949816655)
@instagibbs Note that this is about a separate addition I made, which compares the behaviour with a pure floating-point simulation. The comparison with `CFeeRate` is elsewhere.

💬 instagibbs commented on pull request "feefrac: add support for evaluating at given size":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/30535#discussion_r1949817770)
oh right, I conflated the two threads here

💬 furszy commented on issue "Prune Node Rescan Project Tracking":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/29183#issuecomment-2649137150)
> Since we do need to selectively re-download specific blocks, it might be prudent to have an option only re-download those specific blocks from peers only over TOR

Thats possible for sure. Could also request a few extra blocks to make the guess harder.

> Also, can the re-downloaded blocks be re-downloaded in parallel since we will know what blocks they are?

Yes. Thats how #27837 was implemented.

💬 brunoerg commented on issue "wallet: Branch and Bound producing change":
(https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/31830#issuecomment-2649180340)
friendly ping: @murchandamus