1
0
mirror of https://github.com/bitcoinbook/bitcoinbook synced 2025-04-18 16:19:10 +00:00
This commit is contained in:
Rafael Jan 2025-01-15 07:32:51 -03:00 committed by GitHub
commit eccf3857a4
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
2 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions

View File

@ -952,7 +952,7 @@ program_. It's also possible to wrap the segwit template in a P2SH
commitment, but we won't deal with that in this chapter.
From the perspective of old nodes, these output script templates can be
spent with an empty input script. From the perspective of a new node that
spent with an input script containing just OP_TRUE. From the perspective of a new node that
is aware of the new segwit rules, any payment to a segwit output script
template must only be spent with an empty input script. Notice the
difference here: old nodes _allow_ an empty input script; new nodes

View File

@ -1670,7 +1670,7 @@ exceeds the number of conditions that all the computers in the world
could create.
It's commonly the case that not every authorization condition is equally
as likely to be used. In the our example case, we expect Mohammed and
as likely to be used. In our example case, we expect Mohammed and
his partners to spend their money frequently; the time delayed
conditions only exist in case something goes wrong. We can restructure
our tree with this knowledge as shown in <<diagram_mast3>>.
@ -1698,8 +1698,8 @@ Except for increasing the complexity of Bitcoin slightly, there are no
significant downsides of MAST for Bitcoin and there were two solid
proposals for it, BIP114 and BIP116, before an improved approach was
discovered, which we'll see in <<taproot>>.
.MAST Versus MAST
[[mast_versus_mast]]
=== MAST Versus MAST
****
The earliest((("abstract syntax trees (AST)")))((("AST (abstract syntax trees)"))) idea for what we now know as _MAST_ in Bitcoin was
_merklized abstract syntax trees_. In an abstract syntax tree (AST),