[bitcoin-dev] Schnorr and taproot (etc) upgrade

Russell O'Connor roconnor at blockstream.io
Tue Dec 18 03:18:40 UTC 2018

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 3:16 PM Johnson Lau <jl2012 at xbt.hk> wrote:

> I proposed the same in BIP114. I wish Satoshi had designed that way.

Thanks.  I probably read that and internalized it and forgot you wrote it.

> But I’m not sure if that would do more harm than good. For example, people
> might lose money by copying an existing script template. But they might
> also lose money in the same way as CHECKMULTISIG is disabled. So I’m not
> sure.
> Another related thing I’d like to bikeshed is to pop the stack after
> OP_CLTV and OP_CSV. The same pros and cons apply.

This one is almost a no-brainer I think.  Nearly every instance of OP_CSV
is followed by an OP_DROP and we'd save 1 WU per OP_CSV if we pop the stack
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20181217/8d9e5536/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list