The following sections might be updated with supplementary metadata relevant to reviewers and maintainers.

Code Coverage

For detailed information about the code coverage, see the test coverage report.

Reviews

See the guideline for information on the review process.

If your review is incorrectly listed, please react with 👎 to this comment and the bot will ignore it on the next update.

Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

• #30406 (refactor: modernize-use-equals-default by maflcko)
• #30352 (policy: Add PayToAnchor(P2A), OP_TRUE <0x4e73> as a standard output script for spending by instagibbs)
• #29843 (policy: Allow non-standard scripts with -acceptnonstdtxn=1 (test nets only) by ajtowns)
• #29270 (Implement OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK(VERIFY) by reardencode)
• #29269 (Add OP_INTERNALKEY for Tapscript by reardencode)
• #29247 (Reenable OP_CAT by 0xBEEFCAF3)
• #29221 (Implement 64 bit arithmetic op codes in the Script interpreter by Christewart)

If you consider this pull request important, please also help to review the conflicting pull requests. Ideally, start with the one that should be merged first.

Concept ACK!

Lgtm. It's the simplest and least controversial and has an extremely broad use case set (not perfect for anything but useful for everything). No need to bikeshed if it's the best. It's useful and we need more useful things.

🚧 At least one of the CI tasks failed. Make sure to run all tests locally, according to the
documentation.

Possibly this is due to a silent merge conflict (the changes in this pull request being
incompatible with the current code in the target branch). If so, make sure to rebase on the latest
commit of the target branch.

Leave a comment here, if you need help tracking down a confusing failure.

_{Debug: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/runs/20644946098}

🐙 This pull request conflicts with the target branch and needs rebase.

⌛ There hasn't been much activity lately and the patch still needs rebase. What is the status here?

• Is it still relevant? ➡️ Please solve the conflicts to make it ready for review and to ensure the CI passes.
• Is it no longer relevant? ➡️ Please close.
• Did the author lose interest or time to work on this? ➡️ Please close it and mark it 'Up for grabs' with the label, so that it can be picked up in the future.

Closing for now, given #29198 was closed.