Skip to content
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

EIP-0047: Pooled Transaction Inputs #102

Open
wants to merge 11 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

EIP-0047: Pooled Transaction Inputs #102

wants to merge 11 commits into from

Conversation

aslesarenko
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@aslesarenko aslesarenko marked this pull request as ready for review July 8, 2024 17:07
@Luivatra
Copy link

Luivatra commented Jul 9, 2024

  • Will need to add token support as well, besides just the value
  • Besides leaving the specific inputs undefined at time of signing, would it be possible to leave some outputs undefined as well? Example:
    • Inputs:
      • Some spectrum lp pooled input (spending 1000 sigusd)
      • user pooled input (spending 10 erg)
    • Outputs:
      • Some spectrum lp output (~10 erg more than input)
      • miner box
      • user change box (1000 sigusd + leftover erg)

@aslesarenko
Copy link
Member Author

  • would it be possible to leave some outputs undefined as well?

I think it will be possible to add some flexibility to how Change Outputs are created.
For example each PooledInput can have sendChangeTo: Option[SigmaProp] = None field, which is None by default.
When it is None then change is always returned to the pool, as described in the EIP.
However, when the change address is explicitly specified, then all the change can go to that address.

With this addition your above example will have

  • Inputs:
    • PooledInput(spectrumAddress, SigUSD: 1000, sendChangeTo: Some(userAddress))
    • PooledInput(userAddress, ERG: 10)
  • Outputs:
    • Some spectrum lp output (~10 erg more than input)
    • miner box

So, no need to create change output explicitly, but still need to explicitly specify where the change should go from the pool.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants