📅 Original date posted:2014-07-13
📝 Original message:Hey all,
I'm working on the UTXO database for my Python implementation of bitcoind and have found a situation I did not realize was valid, but since it seems to be, had a quick question.
If you look at block #546 the 4th transaction's first input uses its own block's 3rd transaction as an input.
https://blockchain.info/block/000000005a4ded781e667e06ceefafb71410b511fe0d5adc3e5a27ecbec34ae6
My question is, would the other way be valid, that is, could the 3rd transaction of a block, use the 4th transaction from the same block as an input? Or are transactions processed strictly top to bottom?
Thanks,
RicMoo
P.S. If it is valid, another question; what would happen if a transaction was self-referencing? I realize it would be very difficult to find one, but if I could find a transaction X whose input was X and had an output Y, would Y be a new valid utxo, without being a generation transaction input?
.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸><(((º>
Richard Moore ~ Founder
Genetic Mistakes Software inc.
phone: (778) 882-6125
email: ricmoo at geneticmistakes.com
www: http://GeneticMistakes.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140713/8ed59da4/attachment.html>;
Richard Moore [ARCHIVE] /
npub1rx…jetyf
2023-06-07 15:23:42
in reply to nevent1q…9w8f
Author Public Key
npub1rxqlcf4n2aw0urx6l4g7rjkyng8d5w0lkqphnaycrchyh3dwktzsejetyfPublished at
2023-06-07 15:23:42Event JSON
{
"id": "03ac425ff19b44e76b67f4edc263175329f5383728e0cfe19a45b121c2d20401",
"pubkey": "1981fc26b3575cfe0cdafd51e1cac49a0eda39ffb00379f4981e2e4bc5aeb2c5",
"created_at": 1686151422,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"36b134502549f4a51cf04a43aa16e6d63d1d384108d9fa330efa716f39faf36a",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-07-13\n📝 Original message:Hey all,\n\nI'm working on the UTXO database for my Python implementation of bitcoind and have found a situation I did not realize was valid, but since it seems to be, had a quick question.\n\nIf you look at block #546 the 4th transaction's first input uses its own block's 3rd transaction as an input.\nhttps://blockchain.info/block/000000005a4ded781e667e06ceefafb71410b511fe0d5adc3e5a27ecbec34ae6\n\nMy question is, would the other way be valid, that is, could the 3rd transaction of a block, use the 4th transaction from the same block as an input? Or are transactions processed strictly top to bottom?\n\nThanks,\nRicMoo\n\nP.S. If it is valid, another question; what would happen if a transaction was self-referencing? I realize it would be very difficult to find one, but if I could find a transaction X whose input was X and had an output Y, would Y be a new valid utxo, without being a generation transaction input?\n\n.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸\u003e\u003c(((º\u003e\n\nRichard Moore ~ Founder\nGenetic Mistakes Software inc.\nphone: (778) 882-6125\nemail: ricmoo at geneticmistakes.com\nwww: http://GeneticMistakes.com\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140713/8ed59da4/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "50faa29ef15b50fdc3dd1e30f9697fa2c7b1c9134ee8645a76af3bdf2c3fef8779e88c5408800f1636ee1fa83aebeeaa2e2944a619ca5b6a889cba2ccae83581"
}