4 ms·
Smart contracts are a bad paradigm for developing applications on the ledger, they're far too permissive, the stakes are too high to want to trust your assets t
by MuncleUscles 7y ago
Smart contracts are a bad paradigm for developing applications on the ledger, they're far too permissive, the stakes are too high to want to trust your assets to arbitrary turing-complete code.
You can do much better with composable state machines, because everything you do gets the same level of security as the native token transfers https://www.radixdlt.com/post/radix-engine-a-simple-secure-smart-contract-alternative/ https://www.radixdlt.com/post/radix-engine-a-simple-secure-s...
Disclaimer: I work at Radix
- yodsanklai 7y ago> the stakes are too high to want to trust your assets to arbitrary turing-complete code. Does it matter whether the language is turing-complete or not? you're trusting a contract, not the PL used to write the contract, and the contract can be very simple (and formally verified, if the PL has a formal semantics).
- ddrdrck_ 7y agoI think the point is that it is easier to formally verify a non-Turing-complete PL
- st1ck 7y agoSmart contract language doesn't have to be Turing complete. In 2018 there was a few related R&D projects, so I hope some of them are more mature by now.