You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Considering there is going to be better way for accessing block hashes the BLOCKHASH instruction should be rejected in EOF.
Pros
single way of accessing block hashes
BLOCKHASH instruction is weird
the less instructions the better
Cons
BLOCKHASH instruction provides uniform way of accessing this information across EVM chains (not every chain may have the system contract, or have it before EOF)
BLOCKHASH is cheaper (at least before Verkles)
BLOCKHASH is smaller code
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I do not understand the motivation here. The only way I see how BLOCKHASH has changed is that there now is a bigger window to lookup hashes. If we remove it then you have to do this system call which is definitely more expensive than BLOCKHASH.
The EIP-2935: Serve historical block hashes from state possibly modified the
BLOCKHASH
instruction and provides enhanced alternative in form of a system contract.Considering there is going to be better way for accessing block hashes the
BLOCKHASH
instruction should be rejected in EOF.Pros
BLOCKHASH
instruction is weirdCons
BLOCKHASH
instruction provides uniform way of accessing this information across EVM chains (not every chain may have the system contract, or have it before EOF)BLOCKHASH
is cheaper (at least before Verkles)BLOCKHASH
is smaller codeThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: