🔖 Title: Concrete MATT opcodes

🏷️ Categories: bitcoin-dev

nostr:naddr1qqjr2epkxscn2vec95ursd3c956rswfc95un2ef3943nvvpjvscnwdtzxgmrxqg5waehxw309aex2mrp0yhxgctdw4eju6t0qy2hwumn8ghj7etyv4hzumn0wd68ytnvv9hxgqguwaehxw309ahx7um5wghx6at5d9h8jampd3kx2apwvdhk6q3q2llycjh8gg2lhy4aph9c5au8ch5s0km5axrlxrc6e24dnsaqyu0sxpqqqp65wnn0k2k

⚠️ Heads up! We've now started linking to replaceable long-form events (NIP-23), which allow for dynamic display of thread details like summaries, authors, and more. If you're unable to see this, your client may not support this feature yet.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

📅 Original date posted:2023-08-06

🗒️ Summary of this message: Salvatore Ingala has created a proposal for the core opcodes of MATT, making them functionally complete and improving implementation.

📝 Original message:

On July 30, 2023 11:37:49 AM HST, Salvatore Ingala via bitcoin-dev

>I have put together a first complete proposal for the core opcodes of

>MATT [1][2].

>The changes make the opcode functionally complete, and the

>implementation is revised and improved.

> [...]

>[1] - https://merkle.fun/

>[2] -

>https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-November/021182.html

Hi Salvatore,

Where exactly is the proposal? Merkle.fun links to a "WIP" comment that seems to specify OP_CHECKCONTRACTVERIFY but your text above says "core opcodes" (plural) so I feel like I'm missing something. Also, it being "WIP" makes me wonder if that actually is the "complete proposal" I should be looking for.

When I read "complete proposal", I was expecting a draft BIP.

-Dave