Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

elip151: concatenate unprefixed opcode and script pubkey #82

Conversation

LeoComandini
Copy link
Contributor

This is a breaking change but it adheres more to the ELIP.

@LeoComandini
Copy link
Contributor Author

Currently for scriptpubkey 0014aa..aa, we hash 01ff160014aa...aa
After this we hash ff0014aa..aa

Not sure what's the appropriate thing to do here,
we can go with this MR and change the ELIP test vectors,
we can serialize in a different way,
or edit the ELIP to match the implementation.

@LeoComandini LeoComandini force-pushed the 2024-05-07-elip151-spk-encode branch from e6c88b3 to 4860a0f Compare May 7, 2024 14:11
This is a breaking change but it adheres more to the ELIP.
@LeoComandini LeoComandini force-pushed the 2024-05-07-elip151-spk-encode branch from 4860a0f to bfd84f9 Compare May 7, 2024 14:36
@apoelstra
Copy link
Member

Agreed this is better. Though would be very easy to change the ELIP to say "you have to encode 01ff" rather than "you have to encode ff".

I guess, the question is, is this used anywhere and what would be the consequence of breaking it?

@LeoComandini
Copy link
Contributor Author

is this used anywhere and what would be the consequence of breaking it?

It is exposed by lwk but I've no evidence of anyone using this in prod.
So in theory we're in time to change this if we prefer.

@LeoComandini
Copy link
Contributor Author

But TBH I don't have a preference,
if we prefer to change the ELIP,
I can close this and open a PR there

@apoelstra
Copy link
Member

I have no preference and I'm not involved with lwk at all. So you need to make the call (or find somebody who will).

Just let me know.

@LeoComandini
Copy link
Contributor Author

@apoelstra
I think minimal disruption is changing the ELIP,
opened ElementsProject/ELIPs#13
I'll close this once that is merged

@LeoComandini
Copy link
Contributor Author

We chose to amend the ELIP, closing

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants