Certainly, but I would drop discussion of IsStandard or consensus rules. On Jun 6, 2015 1:24 AM, "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 09:46:17PM -0700, Mark Friedenbach wrote: > > Rusty, this doesn't play well with SIGHASH_SINGLE which is used in > > assurance contracts among other things. Sometimes the ordering is set by > > the signing logic itself... > > But in that case (unconstrained) randomization can't be used either. This > is posed as an alternative to randomization. So in that regard, the > proposal still makes sense. > I think this move to verifyable, deterministic methods where possible is > good. > > Wladimir >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
