Some comments with the tail-call execution semantics BIP:
Tail-call execution semantics require “unclean stake”, i.e. final stake with
more than one item. However, “unclean stake” is invalid (not just non-standard)
in BIP141, so you could only use it with legacy P2SH (which is totally
pointless
I have rewritten and simplified BIP114, and renamed it to “Merklized Script”,
as a more accurate description after consulting the original proposers of MAST.
It could be considered as a special case of MAST, but has basically the same
functions and scaling properties of MAST.
Compared with Frie
Hi Luca,
Bravissimo!
Please allow me to encourage your to follow the BIP workflow as specified
here
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0002.mediawiki#BIP_workflow
BIP Editor freely allocates BIP numberss, however that does not constitute
approval but allows for much easier discussio
Hi ZmnSCPxj,
However, a lockbox on one chain is a WT on the other
> chain. We can create a free lockbox on Ess, then use that lockbox as
> a WT on Tee, inflating TeeCoin.
I'm not sure if I follow what you are saying here. What do you mean by
'free lockbox'? I was assuming that I created an arbi
