> CODESEPARATOR always feels like a loaded weapon, so I avoid it! I've tried to find uses for it several times. Briefly had one as part of a DLC protocol, but ended up killing it with a later revision.
> I'm not sure what the "don't sign the whole script" semantics are for, > but I suspect they're orthogonal to the separation of execution of > OP_SEGMENT. To me, they seem to have basically the same conceptual purpose - compartmentalize validity. SUCCESS only force-validates this portion of the script, CHECKSIG on this signature is only valid in this portion of the script. I'd suggest that having both is silly, and also that with SEGMENT it wouldn't make sense for a signature for a given pubkey intended for one segment to be valid in another segment. Therefore, there is no need to have both. Pick one and it compartmentalizes both signatures and SUCCESSes. All the best, --Brandon -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/abL_L1IFf1-uZaGX%40console.
