Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Merits 11 from 5 users
Re: Taproot proposal
by
gmaxwell
on 17/08/2021, 08:58:12 UTC
⭐ Merited by o_e_l_e_o (4) ,ETFbitcoin (2) ,JayJuanGee (2) ,pooya87 (2) ,dkbit98 (1)
There absolutely are use cases!
Any examples?

Sure!  I mean one of the main features of taproot could be substantially implemented with just using OP_CAT. https://blockstream.com/2015/08/24/en-treesignatures/   (but it's much more cpu/space/fee efficient to implement it directly).

Using string operators on and either a verify-signature-of-data-on-stack or some improved arithmetic operations lets you implement vaults: https://blockstream.com/2016/11/02/en-covenants-in-elements-alpha/

Using substr (or op_cat) you can implement a single show signature--  a output that requires a signature where if someone signs for it more than once, they'll leak the private key.  (You require that the signature use a specific R value). You can use this to make transactions with a double spend penalty.

I think arguably of all the disabled opcodes the "string" ones are really the most useful.