BIP 118’s Motivation part says:
“Doable various approaches could be to outline new script
opcodes, to make use of a unique taproot leaf model, or to make use of a
completely different set of SegWit outputs … nonetheless all of those
approaches are extra sophisticated, and are higher reserved for
different upgrades the place the extra flexibility is definitely wanted.”
What particularly made opcode-level options (e.g. a hypothetical
OP_CHECKSIG_ANYPREVOUT) extra sophisticated than the chosen pubkey-type
method? Was it spec effort, implementation effort, or consensus
floor space?
I am asking as a result of, in gentle of latest CSFS (BIP 348) and CAT
(BIP 347) discussions, the opcode path now appears tractable. Curious
how the unique trade-off was reasoned on the time.
BIP 118’s Motivation part says:
“Doable various approaches could be to outline new script
opcodes, to make use of a unique taproot leaf model, or to make use of a
completely different set of SegWit outputs … nonetheless all of those
approaches are extra sophisticated, and are higher reserved for
different upgrades the place the extra flexibility is definitely wanted.”
What particularly made opcode-level options (e.g. a hypothetical
OP_CHECKSIG_ANYPREVOUT) extra sophisticated than the chosen pubkey-type
method? Was it spec effort, implementation effort, or consensus
floor space?
I am asking as a result of, in gentle of latest CSFS (BIP 348) and CAT
(BIP 347) discussions, the opcode path now appears tractable. Curious
how the unique trade-off was reasoned on the time.
