Execution environments, performance, verification, observability, and upgrades
An approved asset transfer illustrates the validation data and results exchanged with a Native Program, and how Core checks those results against the actual ledger changes.
Follow explicit inputs and outputs, and output IDs computed before execution, to see how Direct Cell separates off-chain construction, signing, and preliminary validation from consensus finality.
Comparing asset transfers expressed as Direct Cell, Native Program, and EVM requests shows who constructs the next state, who validates it, and how the results reach a shared ledger.
A transfer of 100 units shows how absence from historical state differs from uncaptured or unretained data, what a single Cell proof establishes, and who must keep that data available.
An example of authorizing someone else to spend an asset explains why StateCell separates ownership information from permission to change state, and how programs and the ledger divide their responsibilities.
The design behind schema hashes separates values from their structure and recursively combines primitive types, structs, arrays, and mappings.
Starting with research into holding periods, this post explains why nigo-protocol brings explicit UTXO state transitions and the smart contract development experience together in a shared state model called StateCell.
Use a lost transaction submission response to compare BXB's node selection and recovery with the mirror's HTTP retries, and distinguish restoring a connection from confirming a transaction's outcome.
Follow a transfer of 10 tokens to understand HSM key labels and handles, signing digests, Ethereum signature conversion, chain-specific inputs, and connection failures.
Follow a Token-2022 token whose balance can be read but whose transfers are unavailable to see how extension parsing and BXB's command support decisions shape its APIs and signing path.