-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 41
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
Can I use current commit as reveal? #5
Comments
Yes, I found it too. It's only one transaction. |
Did you verify that the inscription which inscribed by our codes would be calculated by unisat? |
Did you verify that the inscription which inscribed by our codes would be calculated by unisat? @ghvn7777 |
@xiaoshengaimm Yes, it's ok, just only the price looks a little higher than unisat. |
Repository owner
deleted a comment
Feb 2, 2024
Repository owner
deleted a comment from
fede-s
Feb 22, 2024
Repository owner
deleted a comment from
skodumur
Feb 23, 2024
Repository owner
deleted a comment from
Sayman71
Feb 23, 2024
Repository owner
deleted a comment from
duskagain
Feb 23, 2024
Repository owner
deleted a comment from
OmerTurann
Mar 4, 2024
Repository owner
deleted a comment from
parth35
Mar 12, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Thanks your sharing amazing project, I have a question, I'm inscribing use unisat web, and i find its tx implementation is a little cheaper compare to your method mentioned in this project.
Unisat looks like to use the first output as a reveal, which results in one less commit, so it makes the same tx cheaper. For example, I find one transaction here, I cane see from the transaction flow picture, the first output has only a reveal.
I have tried to implement this, changing current commit as a inscription taproot script, but it can't get private key from client. Do you have any advice or resource helping me solving this problem ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: