Hi Vitalik, I've learned about the project yesterday and I'm already in love with the idea, can't wait to help you fund it. I have looked at CLL wiki entry and a simple use case I have in mind (app for company shares), and I found it won't be possible to implement dividend sending, since there is no way to iterate over contract storage. I've uploaded a contract sketch to gist and you can see it here I don't really see an issue with allowing to iterate over contract storage, the contract would get charged for every computation step regardless. It might be a bit of an issue to keep all the keys and values in RAM on large data stores though... So it could maybe keep just keys in memory? Perhaps, instead of the way I propose (`contract.storage` acting like a dictionary), it could at least be possible to access storage keys with `contract.storage.keys`? The workaround I see is to use `contract.storage[1001]` and store an array of shareholder addresses there and then iterate over it when invoked with pay a dividend command (it's possible to store arrays as values, right?), but it would use up precious contract storage space to store shareholder addressed in two places. So... are you planning on adding some way to iterate over storage keys? It would be super cool to see it.
Hi Vitalik, I've learned about the project yesterday and I'm already in love with the idea, can't wait to help you fund it. I have looked at CLL wiki entry and a simple use case I have in mind (app for company shares), and I found it won't be possible to implement dividend sending, since there is no way to iterate over contract storage. I've uploaded a contract sketch to gist and you can see it here I don't really see an issue with allowing to iterate over contract storage, the contract would get charged for every computation step regardless. It might be a bit of an issue to keep all the keys and values in RAM on large data stores though... So it could maybe keep just keys in memory? Perhaps, instead of the way I propose (`contract.storage` acting like a dictionary), it could at least be possible to access storage keys with `contract.storage.keys`? The workaround I see is to use `contract.storage[1001]` and store an array of shareholder addresses there and then iterate over it when invoked with pay a dividend command (it's possible to store arrays as values, right?), but it would use up precious contract storage space to store shareholder addressed in two places. So... are you planning on adding some way to iterate over storage keys? It would be super cool to see it.

Hi Vitalik, I've learned about the project yesterday and I'm already in love with the idea, can't wait to help you fund it. I have looked at CLL wiki entry and a simple use case I have in mind (app for company shares), and I found it won't be possible to implement dividend sending, since there is no way to iterate over contract storage. I've uploaded a contract sketch to gist and you can see it here I don't really see an issue with allowing to iterate over contract storage, the contract would get charged for every computation step regardless. It might be a bit of an issue to keep all the keys and values in RAM on large data stores though... So it could maybe keep just keys in memory? Perhaps, instead of the way I propose (`contract.storage` acting like a dictionary), it could at least be possible to access storage keys with `contract.storage.keys`? The workaround I see is to use `contract.storage[1001]` and store an array of shareholder addresses there and then iterate over it when invoked with pay a dividend command (it's possible to store arrays as values, right?), but it would use up precious contract storage space to store shareholder addressed in two places. So... are you planning on adding some way to iterate over storage keys? It would be super cool to see it.

Hi Vitalik, I've learned about the project yesterday and I'm already in love with the idea, can't wait to help you fund it. I have looked at CLL wiki entry and a simple use case I have in mind (app for company shares), and I found it won't be possible to implement dividend sending, since there is no way to iterate over contract storage. I've uploaded a contract sketch to gist and you can see it here I don't really see an issue with allowing to iterate over contract storage, the contract would get charged for every computation step regardless. It might be a bit of an issue to keep all the keys and values in RAM on large data stores though... So it could maybe keep just keys in memory? Perhaps, instead of the way I propose (`contract.storage` acting like a dictionary), it could at least be possible to access storage keys with `contract.storage.keys`? The workaround I see is to use `contract.storage[1001]` and store an array of shareholder addresses there and then iterate over it when invoked with pay a dividend command (it's possible to store arrays as values, right?), but it would use up precious contract storage space to store shareholder addressed in two places. So... are you planning on adding some way to iterate over storage keys? It would be super cool to see it.