New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Introducing Older/After
Translation functionality
#435
Comments
I'm curious if there is any value in using custom types for timelocks. |
@apoelstra, I think there is some value.
|
I am re-evaluating the technical costs regarding mixing timelocks and looks like introducing associated types might be harder here for the reasons listed in the post. We should revisit this after #270 |
@SarcasticNastik, we can discuss this in another medium. I think we should revisit this after LockTime stuff is resolved cleanly. |
Sorry for the late reply. So @sanket1729 and I had a discussion regarding the same and the main issue we faced was we can't analyze the miniscripts for a generic type for |
Up until now, we had support for key translation (and upcoming hash translations) which provide similar analysis guarantees as before. Doing the same for
older/after
does change things, and some of the miniscripts analysis we are able to do might not be possible. For example:-script_size
requires us knowing the serialized length of theolder/after
time integer parameter.Besides associating the
Older
type for a genericMiniscriptKey
tou32
, there are following possibilities we can try to offer:type Older -> u32
association.Analyzable
trait, and use it to store the association as above for proper analysis. (More involving to implement, but gives us more flexibility working with generic miniscripts)older/after
parameteru32
to only supportMiniscriptKey + ToPublicKey
, but we might lose some flexibility here. (easier to implement)I'm confused here and would like to know others' view on the same.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: