Roman Khimov
Roman Khimov
We have Neo 2 NEPs obsoleted now, so this seems to be solved.
The behavior you've described is what will happen with current implementation, that's true. > as long as no re-verification happens between tx executions on block, I feel that ContractY will...
I'd rather go with neo-project/neo-vm#491, as noted in #2782.
> Add an option to allow reserved attributes on the network That would imply VarBytes encoding for reserved attribute's data, probably.
There is a prototype now implemented in nspcc-dev/neo-go#1496, 0xe0-0xff range is used for that.
Experimental protocol extensions of various sorts. Attributes we have now mostly affect P2P/validation/mempool behavior, contracts don't care about this, same thing with #1991 or #1992.
That essentially means using one attribute type for all potential extensions which requires further demultiplexing in practice. Could be done, but a range of attributes seems to be a bit...
#151 can help with this.
Yep, https://github.com/neo-project/proposals/pull/126#discussion_r522309255
> One can create a Smart Contract with such feature, deploying its address with storage for caching signatures and deleting at the end of the process. That's what we're planning...