Our minimal model does not include the ga mechanism that is used at Ethereum to pay miners for contract execution. The sender of a transaction deposits in him a cryptocurrency that will be paid to the minor who attached the transaction to the blockchain. Each instruction carried out by the minor consumes part of that bond; When the deposit reaches zero, the minor stops the transaction from running. At this point, all effects of the transaction (excluding payment to minor) are reset. Our transaction model could be easily extended to a gas mechanism by matching costs to invoices and accounting for gas consumption in the environment. Remarkably, the addition of gas does not invalidate the approximations of the read/written keys, which are correct while the gas is neglected. However, a careful gas analysis may be more accurate: for example, in the open image command in a new window (where the image in the new window opens is a function that exceeds the available gas), a conscious gas analysis could detect that x is not written. Step-firing sequences. Theorem 5 below matches simultaneous execution with the series of transactions. As the semantics of the series execution are indicated in relation to the blockchain states, we use the same semantic domain for the formalization of this correspondence.
This will be done in two stages. First, we define simultaneous versions of the open image in a new window as step-firing sequences (i.e. finished sequences of transition sentences) of the open image in a new window. Then we give a semantics to end the step-throwing sequences in relation to the blockchain. We have proposed a static approach to improve blockchain performance by simultaneously executing transactions. We started introducing a trading and blockchain model. We have defined two transactions that are interchangeable if the reversal of their order does not affect Blockchain status. We then introduced a static reconciliation of swappability based on a static analysis of key games that are read/written by transactions. We ran simultaneous versions of a series of transactions as pass sequences in the associated distribution network. Our main technical result, theorem 5, shows that these simultaneous versions correspond semantically to sequencing. Status updates define how values assigned to qualified keys are changed.
Apply our approach to Ethereum. Applying our theory to Ethereum would require a static analysis of the keys read/written at the EVM byte code.