So you cant give us any part of the code to support your statement? Yup you're not a programmer just a dumb ass who got told what it is.
Can you bro?
None can. You cant prove an negative only positive. The only way would be to exclude every part of a code... So copy pase the code? But that doesn't help right?
This issue is being used as a red herring. Does no one have a problem with the idea that XT is supposed to address the block size issue, but so much code that is irrelevant to that is being pushed out? We can argue all day about one detail or another -- but can you XT supporters explain why the hell it's all there? And why it's being presented solely as a solution to the block size debate?
Strip it down and stop trying to force other changes down our throats.....
Let's not get bogged down by the details. What the hell are these pages and pages of code that have absolutely fuck all to do with block size? And why is it being pushed then solely as a fix for the block size issue?
Not really. XT is compatible with QT now. And it will be with XT and QT+BIP101. You can also run QT+BIP101 if you are worried... And there is a QT made by Mike if you don't like XT. Only BIP101.