Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
jtriley.eth pfp
jtriley.eth
@jtriley
essentials team built out two pieces recently, declarative execution environment (essentialvm) & constraint driven language (pint) pint contracts are composed of a persistent storage block & a series of predicates which constrain how state transitions happen. state access is made explicit in predicates, identifier (counter) may constrain existing state, identifier w single-quote suffix (counter') may constrain next state. vm itself is a 64 bit stack machine w two execution stages, one for loading storage variables into a tx buffer, the other for constraining values in the tx buffer. isa is minimal, w a handful of logical, arithmetic, elliptic curve, sha, storage, and control flow ops note that state is not explicitly assigned to a single value, state is arbitrarily provided by solvers, predicates only constrain the bounds of what solvers submit obligatory counter attached:
2 replies
3 recasts
10 reactions
androidsixteen pfp
androidsixteen
@androidsixteen.eth
do you think that they'll have success convincing Solidity developers to move to a new language and VM? I'm bearish on any "intents" play that doesn't leverage the existing stack
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
jtriley.eth pfp
jtriley.eth
@jtriley
i'm bearish solidity & evm i think devs that want to stay there will be just fine, in the same way java devs are still just fine. but ppl wanting to leverage smth more flexible that's built with the knowledge we have about blockchain execution environments that we didn't then will absolutely try out new vm's and dsl's imo
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
androidsixteen pfp
androidsixteen
@androidsixteen.eth
Don’t you feel there’s too much critical mass around the evm? I get that it has serious flaws, but nothing competes well with a first mover advantage like this I see JavaScript / TS as the better analogy. Garbage origins, slow maturation, but massively pervasive and sticky given tooling lock-in
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
jtriley.eth pfp
jtriley.eth
@jtriley
no, imo the reason moreso that there are no other serious blockchain vm arches competing rn solanavm is a little more restrictive but probs the most mature, move vm is over restrictive and fragmented, algorand vm is clunky and is algorand, fuelvm is cool but founders had a meltdown and now it's not clear whether they're ever going to mainnet, stylus isn't live & the value prop being rust-to-wasm falls flat when it takes a ton of configuring and tinkering to get rust to generate a reasonable wasm output that works for resource constrained env's like blockchains, aztec vm isn't live and actively changing, essential just released their code this week and is also not live and is actively changing evm has momentum, but everyone i know that has used evm for years doesn't like using it anymore. i try to avoid it altogether these days. eof is a step in the right direction, but the language ecosystem is also p lackluster
1 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
androidsixteen pfp
androidsixteen
@androidsixteen.eth
I think the absence of a credible competitor is even more telling that the incumbent has cemented its position It's kind of like the "it just hasn't been done right" argument. Is that the case, or is it just a tar pit, and we're stuck with something shitty that has good penetration? Do you think there are any compelling competitors?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
jtriley.eth pfp
jtriley.eth
@jtriley
maybe "competing" is too 1-dimensional aztec vm will be best for privacy since afaik there's basically no competitor here essential vm i think has potential bc the primary use case for blockchains atm is idiosyncratic trading and its externalities and intents are a natural iteration for on-chain trading where changes are globally propagated more efficiently and lp's receive less toxic order flow, so a swap intent vm alone would be a clean abstraction, but generalizing to all state transition opens unique angles we haven't seen before; idk what this looks like in full yet, just like we had no idea gas tokens or data contracts would emerge from evm but i don't think any of the parallelized or llvm compatible vm's meaningfully "compete" in any way bc they all suffer the same drawbacks. linear scaling is not sufficient for global scale & while 64 bit words run faster than 256, these are cryptography machines at the end of the day and most fields we're using still rely on >250 bits
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
androidsixteen pfp
androidsixteen
@androidsixteen.eth
All makes sense and agree with you that just throughput / architectural efficiencies alone won’t cut it Aztec and Essential carve out a useful niche by actually trying something new I just think those niches will remain small for the near term or will get absorbed into the prevailing vms before liquidity migrates
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction