Description

youngminpark2559

opened on Nov 23, 2017

Issue body actions

At this page:
https://github.com/youngmtool/ProgrammingBlockchain/blob/master/bitcoin_transfer/spend_your_coin.md

At this sentence:
If you want to send 0.5 BTC from a transaction input with 1 BTC you actually have to spend it all!

Should the above sentence be replaced with this sentence?:
If you want to send 0.5 BTC from an output of the different transaction which holds 1 BTC, you actually have to spend it all!

Activity

1. nopara73 commented on Nov 23, 2017

   

   nopara73

   on Nov 23, 2017

   Contributor

   More actions

   How about this one:

   If you want to send 0.5 BTC from an unspent output, which holds 1 BTC, you actually have to spend it all!

   Reacted by Nicolas Dorier
2. NicolasDorier commented on Nov 24, 2017

   

   NicolasDorier

   on Nov 24, 2017

   Collaborator

   More actions

   ACK @nopara73
3. youngminpark2559 commented on Nov 24, 2017

   

   youngminpark2559

   on Nov 24, 2017

   ContributorAuthor

   More actions

   Adding "unspent" makes more clear but don't you think "of the different" next to "output" in the right side makes the meaning also clear?
4. nopara73 commented on Nov 24, 2017

   

   nopara73

   on Nov 24, 2017

   Contributor

   More actions

   @youngmtool
   It's confusing for me. Honestly I don't really understand what you mean by different transaction. Is what you mean is: "you must spend an utxo of a transaction, that's not the one you are building right now."?
5. youngminpark2559 commented on Nov 24, 2017

   

   youngminpark2559

   on Nov 24, 2017

   ContributorAuthor

   More actions

   Yes, with thinking again, I so far assumed the transaction we're making is already included in the transaction of the block which will be created.

   So my intention was to distinguish the transaction which will be included in a new block and transaction for UTXO.

   At the moment when we're writing a transaction, there is no transaction in a block yet.

   Thanks for answer.
6. andrasfuchs

   added a commit that references this issue on Jan 4, 2018

   Changed wording according to issue ProgrammingBlockchain#93

   042ef6e
7. andrasfuchs commented on Jan 4, 2018

   

   andrasfuchs

   on Jan 4, 2018

   Contributor

   More actions

   I changed the wording to the one recommended by @nopara73 in my recent PR #104, so if it gets accepted this issue can be closed.
8. youngminpark2559 commented on Jan 4, 2018

   

   youngminpark2559

   on Jan 4, 2018

   ContributorAuthor

   More actions

   @andrasfuchs Okay. Thanks for informing me.

Issue actions