How about giving 0x1f a name e.g. SIGHASH_MASK and use it in other places anywhere either value is used? The only other use I see is in IsDefinedHashtypeSignature.

@Empact : 0x1f also used in SignatureHash

@jl2012 Sorry to be unclear, was referring to ~SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY

(& ~SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY) has no consensus meaning. Not sure why it was used here in the first place

I would like to see it named SIGHASH_MASK and then placed as a constant some where as well.

utack 283b96b

@Christewart added a commit to define SIGHASH_MASK. I'm fine with or without that.

@MarcoFalke does it need a Validation tag?

re-utack b84c353 . Don't we have a Policy label?

One more use of ~SIGHASH_ANYONECANPAY at https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/script/interpreter.cpp#L193

@Empact that one is correct. It makes only 6 types of SIGHASH standard: 1, 2, 3, 0x81, 0x82, 0x83

utACK 283b96b

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

Conflicts

Reviewers, this pull request conflicts with the following ones:

• #15639 (bitcoin-wallet tool: Drop libbitcoin_server.a dependency by ryanofsky)
• #15638 (Move-only: Pull wallet code out of libbitcoin_server by ryanofsky)
• #13462 (Make SER_GETHASH implicit for CHashWriter and SerializeHash by Empact)

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.