mirror of
https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook
synced 2024-11-05 23:10:03 +00:00
Fix some minor typos
This commit is contained in:
parent
f5aa5d4b21
commit
20befc5e7b
@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ RETURN was initially proposed with a limit of 80 bytes, but the limit was reduce
|
||||
|
||||
=== Timelocks
|
||||
|
||||
Timelocks are restrictions on transactions or outputs that only allow spending after a point in time. Bitcoin has had a transaction-level timelock feature from the beginning. It is implemented by the nLocktime filed in a transaction. Two new timelock features were introduced in late 2015 and mid-2016 that offer UTXO-level timelocks. These are +CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY+, and CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY.
|
||||
Timelocks are restrictions on transactions or outputs that only allow spending after a point in time. Bitcoin has had a transaction-level timelock feature from the beginning. It is implemented by the nLocktime field in a transaction. Two new timelock features were introduced in late 2015 and mid-2016 that offer UTXO-level timelocks. These are +CHECKLOCKTIMEVERIFY+, and CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY.
|
||||
|
||||
Timelocks are useful for post-dating transactions and locking funds to a date in the future. More importantly, timelocks extend bitcoin scripting into the dimension of time, opening the door for complex multi-step smart contracts. We will examine the use of timelocks for smart contracts in <<state_channels>>.
|
||||
|
||||
@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ nLocktime and CLTV are both _absolute timelocks_ in that the specify an absolute
|
||||
|
||||
Relative timelocks are useful because they allow a chain of two or more interdependent transactions to be held off chain, while imposing a time constraint on one transaction that is dependent on the elapsed time from the confirmation of a previous transaction. In other words, the clock doesn't start counting until the UTXO is recorded on the blockchain. This functionality is especially useful in bi-directional state channels and Lightning network, as we will see in <<state_channels>>.
|
||||
|
||||
Relative timelocks, like absolute timelocks are implemented with both a transaction-level feature and a script-level opcode. The transaction-level relative timelock is implemented as a consensus rule on the value of nSequence, a transaction field which is set in every transaction input. Script-level relative timelocks are implemented with the CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY opcode.
|
||||
Relative timelocks, like absolute timelocks, are implemented with both a transaction-level feature and a script-level opcode. The transaction-level relative timelock is implemented as a consensus rule on the value of nSequence, a transaction field which is set in every transaction input. Script-level relative timelocks are implemented with the CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY opcode.
|
||||
|
||||
Relative timelocks are implemented according to the specifications in the following BIPs:
|
||||
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user