In D1606#34272, @schancel wrote:

There should be some additional testing in the magnetic anomaly activation test.

See here that there's already a test landed: https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/rABC4714cd3622565b35d08fa71d932482ad760cc0ba

refactor based on re-organizing prior diffs

refactor the diffs to be more coherent and scope refined

another rebase

• specification has been updated to remove OP_2MUL & OP_2DIV

• remove OP_2MUL & OP_2DIV tests that were added for magnetic, they are no longer being re-enabled

need to remove the extra tests added for OP_2MUL & OP_2DIV

• split up tests into their own sections, they will be expanded later
• merge CHECKDATASIG and MAGNETIC_OPCODES flags
• update comment to reflect change in flag

OP_2MUL & OP_2DIV removed from planned change.

The opcodes were disabled, not invalid. See lines 85-93 in interpreter.cpp

need to re-organize this, it has conflicting changes with some other of the diffs

the reorganiztion of script_tests.json shouldnt be in this diff

• split up tests into their own sections, they will be expanded later
• merge CHECKDATASIG and MAGNETIC_OPCODES flags
• rebase & correct extra CHECKDATASIG flag
• update comment to reflect change in flag

Yes, that was careless of me, sorry.

rebased and updated

• add negative zero test

• merge CHECKDATASIG and MAGNETIC_OPCODES flags

• merge CHECKDATASIG and MAGNETIC_OPCODES flags

Add a flag to gate opcodes activation for the magnetic upgrade & re-organize json tests

Add a flag to gate opcodes activation for the magnetic upgrade & organize json tests

re-organize the json tests into their own groups

add test for other side of IMPOSSIBLE_ENCODING edge case & move expected result to output script

shrink a number that is not minimally encoded - should pass

add several tests for NUM2BIN:

• try to squeeze a 3 byte number into a 2 byte binary vector - IMPOSSIBLE_ENCODING error
• convert a 520 byte number into a binary - should pass
• convert a number that is not minimally encoded - should pass, minimal encoding does not apply to the first operand
• use non-minimally encoded number for second operand - should fail, must be minimally encoded
• use 5 byte second operand - should fail, second operand must be <= 4 bytes long

@jasonbcox good plan. added new tests.

fix T288 and misc small issues

Just a quick note: I'm not sure that the banscore test is valid. I want to split this diff in two, with the tests defined first to confirm behaviour before the changes.

This diff does not fix T288, the tests work around it.

• fix non-activation of monolith script flag in AcceptToMemoryPoolWorker()
• chain reorganization fixes
• banscore test

add functional tests, which are failing - flags not set properly when CScriptCheck:operator() in validation.cpp calls VerifyScript()

minor update

resubmit D1103 - OP_NUM2BIN

resubmit D1101, updated for underlying changes

resubmit D1099 - OP_SPLIT

resubmit D1097, corrected for changes in other diffs further down the stack

resubmit D1095 - op_mod

resubmit OP_DIV opcode

remove erroneously included changes to script.py

moved flag from parent diff into this one

In diff https://reviews.bitcoinabc.org/D1141?id=3141#inline-4397 @deadalnix commented on the definition of OP_SPLIT that "You can have two enum entries with the same value.". The definition of OP_SPLIT in that diff replaced the definition of OP_SUBSTR, removing OP_SUBSTR in the process.

updates based on comments
remove SCRIPT_ENABLE_OPCODES_MONOLITH flag, move to separate diff
correct value of opcodes NUM2BIN and BIN2NUM, replacing LEFT & RIGHT
change MAX_DEFINED_OP_VALUE into FIRST_UNDEFINED_OP_VALUE

Will move the flag up in the stack.

reorganize D1095

reorganize

reorganize D1090

reorganize the stack of changes to support re-enabled opcodes