Why Nostr? What is Njump?
2023-06-07 04:53:06
in reply to

theymos [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: πŸ“… Original date posted:2011-12-29 πŸ—’οΈ Summary of this message: OP_EVAL ...

πŸ“… Original date posted:2011-12-29
πŸ—’οΈ Summary of this message: OP_EVAL proposal makes script language Turing complete with a limit on recursion depth, but all operations still need to be explicitly specified. OP_CODEHASH eliminates the need for script ops to be in strings.
πŸ“ Original message:On Thu, Dec 29, 2011, at 01:55 AM, roconnor at theorem.ca wrote:
> The number of operations executed is still bounded by the number of
> operations occurring in the script. With the OP_EVAL proposal the
> script language becomes essentially Turing complete, with only an
> artificial limit on recursion depth preventing arbitrary computation
> and there is no way to know what code will run without executing it.

Even if OP_EVAL allowed infinite depth, you'd still need to explicitly
specify all operations performed, since there is no way of looping.

I think that something like OP_EVAL will eventually be used to improve
Script in a backward-compatible way (enable the disabled math ops, fix
bugs, etc.), so the mechanism might as well be used now. The only
advantage I see with OP_CODEHASH is that script ops won't need to be in
Script "strings".
Author Public Key
npub10vt6y7m6shn8hfuj83zjlwcga4fky38kv73qz6xlcvtj4q7fjt0sqmper0