ValidTransaction and ValidBlock #28
Conversation
Add tests
…lement-verification
29 makefile
blockchain/blockchain.go
Outdated
| // Find the transaction input (I) in the chain (by hash) | ||
| var I *Transaction |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe use input rather than I
| if inAmount != outAmount { | ||
| return false | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We also need to check that input transaction hasn't been spent between when it was created and now, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🥇 I've added a test case.
| return false | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify every Transaction in the block. | ||
| for _, t := range b.Transactions { | ||
| if !bc.ValidTransaction(t) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What if two transactions in b.Transactions reference the same input?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🥇 I've added a test case.
| return false | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // Verify every Transaction in the block. | ||
| for _, t := range b.Transactions { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We also need to discuss how to spend coins that were mined, since there is no transaction for them to refer to. Do we have the miner insert a special transaction for their mined coins, or modify the Transaction struct to be able to refer to block rewards as inputs?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel like setting the Transaction.Input to some special value is a good way to go. Perhaps then we could get away with treating it as a normal block during verification (ie. I'd like to avoid special cases in the VerifyX functions). By convention, we could put the block reward in Transactions[0].
chadlagore
changed the title
|
Going to merge this now @chadlagore |
Status: Ready to merge.
What Changed
ValidTransactionandValidBlock.Opening this up for visibility early!☺️ Not done yet.I've changed the base branch to
devTODO
Signatureverification.