Less clever would be to be sloppy with your memory and do some extra copies. Standard vs non-standard as in the OP

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

Quote from: toast on May 01, 2014, 04:34:26 AM
Are you referring to this?
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/blob/ab177ba65f4355af9805b4e7451ed9f7dba8a0b7/libraries/blockchain/block.cpp#L49

I think that's just a clever way of doing the standard merkle tree. Notice "2*sizeof(uint160)". Your interpreted simplification effectively doesn't include t1 or t3.

Is there some other way to do it that is less clever or more standard?

Quote from: CrazyBit on May 01, 2014, 05:48:46 AM

Quote from: toast on May 01, 2014, 04:34:26 AM
Are you referring to this?
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/blob/ab177ba65f4355af9805b4e7451ed9f7dba8a0b7/libraries/blockchain/block.cpp#L49

I think that's just a clever way of doing the standard merkle tree. Notice "2*sizeof(uint160)". Your interpreted simplification effectively doesn't include t1 or t3.

Quote2*sizeof(uint160)

oh, i overlooked the highlighted code segment,agree that it is a clever way to implement the standard merkle tree. it makes the code elegant and easier to understand. +5% +5% +5%

Thanks for reviewing the code and looking for bugs as this level even if it was a false alarm :)

Quote from: toast on May 01, 2014, 04:34:26 AM
Are you referring to this?
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/blob/ab177ba65f4355af9805b4e7451ed9f7dba8a0b7/libraries/blockchain/block.cpp#L49

I think that's just a clever way of doing the standard merkle tree. Notice "2*sizeof(uint160)". Your interpreted simplification effectively doesn't include t1 or t3.

Quote2*sizeof(uint160)

oh, i overlooked the highlighted code segment,agree that it is a clever way to implement the standard merkle tree. it makes the code elegant and easier to understand. +5% +5% +5%

Are you referring to this?
https://github.com/BitShares/bitshares_toolkit/blob/ab177ba65f4355af9805b4e7451ed9f7dba8a0b7/libraries/blockchain/block.cpp#L49

I think that's just a clever way of doing the standard merkle tree. Notice "2*sizeof(uint160)". Your interpreted simplification effectively doesn't include t1 or t3.

Quotelayer_two.push_back(  small_hash( (char*)&layer_one, 2*sizeof(uint160) ) );

I checked the implement, which seems not the same with your simplification? How did you get that?

     root
      / \
   A      B
  / \    / \
t1 t2 t3 t4


A=hash(t1,t2)
B=hash(t3,t4)
Root=hash(A,B)

presented above is the typical merkle tree algorithm, but seems the merkle  tree algorithm in bitshares toolkit is simplified as below(if i my understanding is not wrong),what is the purpose?is it still work properly after simplified ?and any benefit from the simplification?

A=hash(t2)
B=hash(t4)
Root=hash(B)