-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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
[Feature Request] Interop or VM functionality #263
Comments
I prefer Interop |
Can this be built in compilers? |
It can be in the compilers to convert /unconvert at compile time. But for |
In the spirit of the conversation, I'd like to ask for another related method hahaha is there some sort of |
What’s the use case for using base58 addresses vs just always using script hashes in smart contracts? |
@dicarlo2 you made me think about it and I suddently dont want this feature anymore... O.o let me explain why. base58 address and scripthash are almost the same, but the first comes with integrity check. If that existed months ago , I believe some problems in some smart contracts wouldnt have existed (I cannot go into details), because of this integrity check and perhaps stronger type checking for address type (not just bytearray) being allowed in.upper level languages. But now these problems seem to be solved in another way, and Im starting to question if this current base58 address format is the best for users (I dont think so). So, if other address standards exist in the future , we would need more interop.... so perhaps its better to keep only scripthash in lower levels, like you just said :) but I dont know for sure, must think more, carefully... |
Base58 addresses for UI, scripthash for lower levels. |
* Minor fixes on NEO-CLI for Spanish translation * Improve whitepaper and other docs on Spanish translate
Add the following methods ( or similar) to the interop layer or VM:
Hex
Unhex
ScriptHashToAddress
AddressToScriptHash
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: