{
  "@context": {
    "@language": "es-ES",
    "CIP100": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0100/README.md#",
    "CIP119": "https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0119/README.md#",
    "hashAlgorithm": "CIP100:hashAlgorithm",
    "body": {
      "@id": "CIP119:body",
      "@context": {
        "summary": "CIP119:summary",
        "rationale": "CIP119:rationale",
        "references": "CIP119:references"
      }
    }
  },
  "hashAlgorithm": "blake2b-256",
  "body": {
    "summary": "IO & VacuumLabs: Enhancing Plutus - Performance, Correctness, and Usability",
    "rationale": "This proposal targets UPLC — the low-level bytecode that all Cardano smart contracts compile to, regardless of the higher-level language used. Improvements to UPLC execution efficiency, formal specification, and developer tooling benefit not just Plinth/PlutusTx but every language in the ecosystem: Aiken, Pebble, OpShin, Scalus, and any future language targeting UPLC. This is infrastructure-level work with broad impact.\nThe technical scope is well-defined and time-sensitive. Built-in casing on Data, multiIndexArray, and BuiltinValue functions reduce on-chain execution costs. Property-based conformance testing is a prerequisite for credible node diversity. Removing Nix as a Plinth dependency addresses a documented barrier to developer adoption. The delivery window between Van Rossem and Dijkstra is the correct moment to execute, and the co-venture with VacuumLabs distributes Plutus stewardship across organizations.\nI vote YES on the technical merits and the milestone-based disbursement structure with Intersect oversight.\nTransparency Requested\nBudget breakdown. 86% of the ask is allocated to \"Development\" with no disclosure of how funds split between IO and VacuumLabs, nor which deliverables each organization owns. A co-venture claiming to distribute stewardship should disclose the distribution.\nPrior treasury context. IO has ~₳52M undrawn from previous allocations (IOE at 49% withdrawn). Future proposals should include delivery status on prior treasury-funded work before requesting additional funds.\nFactual accuracy. CIP-0156 is described as \"already-ratified\" in the proposal. It is listed as \"Proposed\" in the official CIP repository. Quantitative claims (1,982 conformance tests, ~25% scope check overhead) lack public citations. These should be verifiable.",
    "references": []
  },
  "authors": [
    {
      "name": "drep15jspgw8ea9pw3w0fwyqam2lw58ulw7z6qhr8qyuah7j0yj962w7",
      "witness": {
        "witnessAlgorithm": "ed25519",
        "publicKey": "078c04a088ee52fe58d3257993ea6ec90f0b1dd59e4456a6b0e97e81f09525df"
      }
    }
  ]
}