3 ms·

I'm not a Ethereum core dev, but this is my understanding: The EVM is tailor-made to accurately account for the expense of executing programs in a distributed

I'm not a Ethereum core dev, but this is my understanding: The EVM is tailor-made to accurately account for the expense of executing programs in a distributed environment. It has a highly heterogeneous addressing scheme. Every opcode has execution cost metering that has been refined over time. Each word is 256 bits to make 256-bit cryptographic operations easier. There's significant tooling around the EVM for writing and analyzing smart contracts. Other EVM-based blockchains would need to migrate in parallel. The skillset of "blockchain application developer" has coalesced around Solidity and the EVM. Bottom line is that although WASM offers compatibility with non-blockchain tooling, the blockchain-specific needs of Ethereum are so much better served by the EVM that migrating is difficult.

jwlake 5y ago
The EVM design choices are tightly bound with the on-chain storage of data. On ethereum you pay for reads (less) and writes (more) but everything is very expensive because it's stored in a merkle tree with computationally expensive operations. Alot of the WASM experimentation has also included changes around how storage is charged. Specifically NEAR does a deposit system where you have to HODL to store data on chain. That allows them to innovate in the runtime and cost structure and still incentivize blockchain nodes. So it's not entirely gas accounting for computation, its more pricing for storage that probably keeps eth on EVM indefinitely. Other experimental chains are must more likely to become robust and trusted and more performant and then eclipse ethereum.
- duncancmt 5y ago
  Ethereum considered implementing storage rents, like NEAR, but instead decided to transition to a verkle trie model that permits succinct proofs of state values. State rent presents some serious problems regarding composeability. What the state-of-the-art solution for state rent on resources that are effectively common goods?

jwlake 5y ago

The EVM design choices are tightly bound with the on-chain storage of data. On ethereum you pay for reads (less) and writes (more) but everything is very expensive because it's stored in a merkle tree with computationally expensive operations. Alot of the WASM experimentation has also included changes around how storage is charged. Specifically NEAR does a deposit system where you have to HODL to store data on chain. That allows them to innovate in the runtime and cost structure and still incentivize blockchain nodes. So it's not entirely gas accounting for computation, its more pricing for storage that probably keeps eth on EVM indefinitely. Other experimental chains are must more likely to become robust and trusted and more performant and then eclipse ethereum.

duncancmt 5y ago
Ethereum considered implementing storage rents, like NEAR, but instead decided to transition to a verkle trie model that permits succinct proofs of state values. State rent presents some serious problems regarding composeability. What the state-of-the-art solution for state rent on resources that are effectively common goods?