User talk:Etotheipi - Revision history

Smtp: another error

2013-01-09T11:40:22Z

another error

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:40, 9 January 2013
Line 17:		Line 17:
	Greetings		Greetings
	smtp		smtp

			* Hi again
			I found the last error in my implementation of OP_CHECKSIG. I thought firstly it was a bug introduced by myself. Sadly it is based on another error in your picture [:File:Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png]. All your "empty strings" when replacing these txin-scripts in step 7 , are '''no empty strings, but exactly the single byte 0x00''' (for the length of the new txin-script).

			This should also be corrected when you update the picture.

			[[User:Smtp\|Smtp]] ([[User talk:Smtp\|talk]]) 11:40, 9 January 2013 (GMT)

Smtp: /* File:Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png */

2013-01-08T17:50:32Z

File:Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:50, 8 January 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==File:Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png==		==[[:File:Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png]]==

	Hi		Hi
Line 8:		Line 8:
	'''But you forgot to place the length byte(s?) infront of this in the picture!'''		'''But you forgot to place the length byte(s?) infront of this in the picture!'''

	Also in the writen [[~~https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/~~OP_CHECKSIG#How_it_works]] this tiny but decisive information is missing. Is this always 1 byte? Or the Var-length encoding of the length for the new to be inserted subscript? The latter I assume. I will change the documentation. Also I think it is good to place		Also in the writen [[OP_CHECKSIG#How_it_works]] this tiny but decisive information is missing. Is this always 1 byte? Or the Var-length encoding of the length for the new to be inserted subscript? The latter I assume. I will change the documentation. Also I think it is good to place
	for this example the Pubkey, ~~Hash aund Signature~~ in ~~Raw Hexadecimal~~ for other ~~programmars~~ to check easily.		for this example the Pubkey, hash and signature in raw hexadecimal for other programmers to check easily.

	Thus, would you please make soon a new "Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png" and replace the current one in bitcoin-wiki? :)		Thus, would you please make soon a new "Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png" and replace the current one in bitcoin-wiki? :)

Smtp: Great work/help, but there is an very important miss :)

2013-01-08T16:29:43Z

Great work/help, but there is an very important miss :)

New page

==File:Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png==

Hi

I JUST first time successfully verified a signature of a bitcoin transaction (the first in the 170th block of the main-chain). The last undocumentated problem / was an important miss in your really helpful and detailed picture.

In step 8 the subscript string of step 4 is inserted into the Txin0.
'''But you forgot to place the length byte(s?) infront of this in the picture!'''

Also in the writen [[https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/OP_CHECKSIG#How_it_works]] this tiny but decisive information is missing. Is this always 1 byte? Or the Var-length encoding of the length for the new to be inserted subscript? The latter I assume. I will change the documentation. Also I think it is good to place
for this example the Pubkey, Hash aund Signature in Raw Hexadecimal for other programmars to check easily.

Thus, would you please make soon a new "Bitcoin OpCheckSig InDetail.png" and replace the current one in bitcoin-wiki? :)

BTW: I like to repeat: ''Nice, detailed and very helpful picture.'' :)

Greetings
smtp