On Wed, May 11, 2005 at 02:51:33PM -0700, "Hal Finney" wrote:
David Shaw writes:
What about (onepass, literal, literal, literal, sig) ? Treat as the
multiple literal bodies concatenated together?
I don't think we should allow this. There are too many potentials
for mischief due to the absence of boundary information feeding into
the signature.
Note that this is currently legal syntax in the grammar.
(I actually suggested the run-of-literal-packets grammar change to
resolve a problem elsewhere in the document, but that doesn't mean I
was right).
David