Brecht Devos

@OrestTa @gwyneth_taiko Depends on how big the ultra tx gets yes. If it gets too big too fit in a single tx, EIP-7814 would solve this for all practical purposes: github.com/ethereum/EIPs/…

@gwyneth_taiko So this will be incompatible with the EIPs limiting gas per tx (to make L1 more parallel-zk-friendly), right?

for the past few months we’ve been working on a way to make ethereum blocks more programmable and enable synchronous composability (yes we are running sharding back turbo) here’s how ULTRA TX is going to help us achieve this 🧵👇

覚醒せよ、光の戦士。

@OrestTa Just point to the new RPC, and then the dapp can switch chains if it needs/supports it. If the dapp doesn’t support/need it, the default chain will be used so normal behavior. No changes to wallets necessary for this.

@Brechtpd Wallet and dApp support? Could be added via that switch chain id context method?

I created a simple RPC router that allows switching between chains easily. Great for @gwyneth_taiko with its dynamic L2s, but also great for a unified Ethereum. Imagine a world where users just see Ethereum and internally all its (based) rollups are also used. This is Gwyneth.

@OrestTa @gwyneth_taiko Could be zero assumptions if L1 still fully manages the contract with all checks, so full isolation from the L2. The L2 is then only used for batching. But Gwyneth also allows direct writes to contracts on other chains where only diffs are applied, so it depends.

@Brechtpd @gwyneth_taiko How and at what assumptions would state sharing work, e.g. for liquidity sharing?

Gwyneth is now a full booster rollup! Contracts deployed on L1 are now directly available on L2. Dapps scale automatically across all @gwyneth_taiko L2s, no need to set anything up on the L2 itself. More rollups -> More L1 scaling. Like God intended.

@brianseong @gwyneth_taiko Never enough. We need to scale Ethereum to all the hello kitties.

@Brechtpd @gwyneth_taiko Thats a lot of hellos kitties 🤣

@mteamisloading @gwyneth_taiko Once the devops people can get that done! Soon(ish). Already usable using a local deployment or in foundry because everything is open source at all times.

@Brechtpd @gwyneth_taiko cool, does this mean there is a testnet with it working?

I made this image which I like and you are also now privileged to look at it. It also bumps this thread to a massive three posts which makes it a very serious twitter thread.

Read more about booster rollups here: x.com/Brechtpd/statu…

A test example is below. Switching chains works exactly the same way it does in Gwyneth. github.com/taikoxyz/gwyne…

I forked Foundry to add @gwyneth_taiko support so you can write, test, and deploy synchronously composable smart contracts in your comfort zone. No new syntax is necessary. Everything works exactly the way you’re used to. github.com/taikoxyz/found…

we're hosting a workshop in Denver during Composability Day! build multi-chain apps, test cross-chain swaps on Gwyneth's upcoming devnet, and see L1<>L2 synchronous composability in action. donuts 🍩🍩🍩 and immaculate ~vibes~~~ included. event link below. ⮯

@OrestTa @gwyneth_taiko doesn't matter it sounds good

@gwyneth_taiko Hmm where in the roadmap is SYNCHRONOUS composability a key piece?

synchronous composability a key piece of the rollup-centric roadmap, but what does it look like in action? why not see it for yourself with a real-world demo: swapping tokens on L2, using L1 liquidity, seamlessly

@Pr0cessus0 @gwyneth_taiko based rollups are cool. But do know that almost all of these properties are not because Gwyneth is a based rollup. Gwyneth really only practically benefits from being based when a user wants a preconf for a transaction requiring L1 sync composability.

@Brechtpd @gwyneth_taiko based rollups are even cooler than what i thought

- No solvers. There's nothing to solve. Just good old fashioned builders throwing hardware at the problem. - Works for everything. (Non-)fungible tokens, plain data, everything. - Realtime - No liquidity requirements. - No fragmentation. No cluster nonsense. soon @gwyneth_taiko

@Pr0cessus0 @gwyneth_taiko Can’t really think of any practical reason somebody would still use those, they would only increase fragmentation. I say practical, because theoretically you can make up some reasons (governance bad) but I don’t believe that’s the right tradeoff (can be achieved in a better way)

@Brechtpd @gwyneth_taiko Am i mistaken or synchronous composability will make third party bridges irrelevant for lots of cases?

How? capricious-firefly-0c5.notion.site/Gwyneth-Techni…

@vulturecorso Depends on how the contract works. I would say ideally it’s best if the contract is aware of it, but there are ways around that.

@Brechtpd do existing l1 contracts have to be redeployed then? in order to use this

Wrote an explanation of the overall design of @gwyneth_taiko: capricious-firefly-0c5.notion.site/Gwyneth-Techni… Read the thread below for a summary.