Jorge Timón [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2022-05-07 📝 Original message:On Sat, May 7, 2022 at ...

📅 Original date posted:2022-05-07
📝 Original message:On Sat, May 7, 2022 at 5:52 AM <vjudeu at gazeta.pl> wrote:

> > Re-enabling OP_CAT with the exact same OP would be a hardfork, but
> creating a new OP_CAT2 that does the same would be a softfork.
>
> We have TapScript for that. OP_CAT is defined as OP_SUCCESS, it can be
> re-enabled in a soft-fork way. For now, OP_CAT in TapScript simply means
> "anyone can move those coins", so adding some restrictions is all we need
> to re-enable this opcode. Introducing OP_CAT2 is not needed at all, unless
> it will be totally different, but then it should not be named as OP_CAT2,
> but rather as OP_SOMETHING_ELSE, it depends how different it will be from
> OP_CAT.
>

Oh, well, I didn't know any of that. I guess it could be a modification of
OP_SUCCESS if it makes sense instead of a new opcode.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20220507/6b3c1b24/attachment.html>;