Peter Todd [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2016-09-20 📝 Original message:On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at ...

📅 Original date posted:2016-09-20
📝 Original message:On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:15:45PM +0200, Tom via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> === Serialization order===
>
> The tokens defined above have to be serialized in a certain order for the
> transaction to be well-formatted. Not serializing transactions in the
> order specified would allow multiple interpretations of the data which
> can't be allowed.

If the order of the tokens is fixed, the tokens themselves are redundant
information when tokens are required; when tokens may be omitted, a simple
"Some/None" flag to mark whether or not the optional data has been omitted is
appropriate.


Also, if you're going to break compatibility with all existing software, it
makes sense to use a format that extends the merkle tree down into the
transaction inputs and outputs.

--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160920/04780272/attachment.sig>;