<Elijah[m]> "Stagenet is just mainnet code..." <- There isn't any difference?

Youre free to pay money for stage net xmr if you want but I'm pretty sure they flow like water

lol

Ehh sorry for being off-topic, but I'm actually from Translation Workgroup. Does "Change" here means "alter" or "small money"?

"Claimed change does not go to a paid address" 🤔 i don't understand the original sentence

but it is 'small money'

Understood, thanks!

Iirc one of the ways monero obscures your tx is by sending an amount greater than what you tell it, and then routing the change back to yourself. So if you want to send 1 xmr, your wallet sends 5 xmr total, 1 to the real recipient and 4 back to you

So the 4 is "change"

That's not obfuscation, and all cryptos do that. A tx input must be spent as a whole, by design; so when you have a 5 xmr input and you need to send 1 xmr to someone, you must also send the "remaining" 4 xmr somewhere else (i.e. a separate output that goes back to you, aka change)

Think of each tx output as a euro/dollar bill, but instad of standard denominations (1, 5, 10, etc.) they can have any value

TIL

> That's not obfuscation, and all cryptos do that. A tx input must be spent as a whole, by design; so when you have a 5 xmr input and you need to send 1 xmr to someone, you must also send the "remaining" 4 xmr somewhere else (i.e. a separate output that goes back to you, aka change)

I may be missing something but why is change necessary, shouldn't cryptocurrency be subdividable to whatever degree the spec allows in which case you'd just send the amount and be done with it?

> <@pagwin:matrix.org> > That's not obfuscation, and all cryptos do that. A tx input must be spent as a whole, by design; so when you have a 5 xmr input and you need to send 1 xmr to someone, you must also send the "remaining" 4 xmr somewhere else (i.e. a separate output that goes back to you, aka change)

> I may be missing something but why is change necessary, shouldn't cryptocurrency be subdividable to whatever degree the spec allows in which case you'd just send the amount and be done with it?

Indivisibility of outputs is an organizational design. Think of fiat bills, one or more outputs are spent completely to execute a transaction and change is received.

Heads up that the melo.tools nodes are migrating to a new URL at community.rino.io, anyone needing a remote mainnet/stagenet/testnet node can see more info here: community.rino.io/nodes.html

"Adding a new block to the chain means the entire 40Gb file has to be re-written even though the last seven years of blockchain data has not changed."

From the above pr.

Is this correct?. Doesn't sound right

There cant be anyway that i'm rewriting 40gb every2 mins. .. my device isnt that fast.

It is indeed obviously not true.

<binaryFate> "Heads up that the melo.tools..." <- Thanks for the info! Do you have an estimate on when the old domain is gonna stop working? The atomic swap cli (comit) currently defaults to the old domain for the remote node

<Elijah[m]> "Just wait 3 minutes when you can..." <- I waited really long and the onNewBlock callback never gets called.

maybe I did something wrong I dont know.

I also put a breakpoint here: github.com/monero-ecosystem/monero-…js/wallet/MoneroWalletFull.js#L1759 but it never gets hit....maybe there is some issue with the daemon or there is another reason for this haha...I think I just need to work on another part and then come back....but its not easy to back off haha

<binarybaron[m]> "Thanks for the info! Do you have..." <- Comit has no maintainer ATM iirc

I and a few other volunteers submit pull requests and review them. Thomas Eizinger (part of the comit team) also reviews PRs and usually merges them within a few days. It's not completely unmaintained, but the situation could be better.

<spirobel[m]> "maybe I did something wrong I..." <- or maybe my assumptions were wrong. I just double checked: It seems like the wallet is connected to the daemon and it is synced. I dont know why but I assumed that even after a short period of time it would not be synced and these listeners would start to fire. Also I expected this onNewBlock listener to fire when a new block gets added to the chain like it is stated in the docs. But

maybe this is just not how it works. It could also be the case that because I do background syncing with walletFull.startSyncing(1000); that these sync and new block related listeners dont fire and they only fire when walletFull.sync(listener) is called. All of this is just speculation. Just wanted to put it out there to heal my mind haha 😅😆 If there is someone else who implemented a wallet with monero-javascript or has any advice

on this I would be glad. How do you handle syncing? I currently do walletFull.startSyncing(1000) to start the background syncing and attach the listener with walletFull.addListener(listener). I dont know if this is the right approach and if there are any other approaches. If you have any ideas let me know 🥰

spirobel: im still learning how to integrate monero-javascript. haven't displayed sync progress yet. just testing on new wallets. will check it out and let you know

I have one more guess: github.com/monero-ecosystem/monero-…js/wallet/MoneroWalletFull.js#L1745 maybe to listen to the sync process we need to pass the listener to sync(listener) there. but it isnt passed for the background sync as seen in this function. In the function we can see it adds the listners than queues a sync task to the wasm module and then removes the

listener again github.com/monero-ecosystem/monero-…/js/wallet/MoneroWalletFull.js#L680 I wonder if it is necessary to remove and attach listeners before and after the sync process or if this is just because it was decided to be like this for the wallet.sync() API. I hoped/assumed I can just attach a listener with wallet.addListener(listener) and be done with it.

(without a need to attach, or remove listeners and be able to depend on them firing when expected) but it seems like that isnt the case and it is not that easy to get this right. 🥺

just did some more tests. the listeners dont fire because either there were no new blocks (created the wallet yesterday...would be surprising) or because they only fire when related to the wallet. Maybe the confusing also comes from that onNewBlock does not refer to the chain but to the wallet. (not really coherent and just speculation lol)

s/confusing/confusion/

it should fire for any new block added

you can mine yourself to ensure the network has blocks added

you can also print the height to check if it's increasing