*Note that a summary of this article has been published on Metastate's Medium blog.*

This document gives a succinct introduction to the Michelson language, and proceeds to describe the semantics of the new types and instructions in the following features:

- Support for the elliptic curve construction BLS12-381: new types
`bls12_381_g1`

,`bls12_381_g2`

,`bls12_381_fr`

,`bls12_381_g1_compressed`

and`bls12_381_g2_compressed`

, and new instructions`COMPRESS`

,`DECOMPRESS`

and`PAIRING_CHECK`

. - More cryptographic hash algorithms: new instructions
`SHA3`

and`KECCAK`

. - Support for
*forbidden branches*: new type`never`

and new instruction`NEVER`

. - More comparable types: types
`key`

,`signature`

and`chain_id`

made comparable. - Voting power data: new instructions
`VOTING_POWER`

and`TOTAL_VOTING_POWER`

. - General improvements: new instructions
`SELF_ADDRESS`

and`LEVEL`

, and macro`UNPAIR`

promoted to instruction.

## Introduction to the Michelson language

Michelson is a stack-based language with high-level data types and primitives, which shares traits with languages from different families like Forth, ML, Scheme and Cat. The language is *strongly typed* (interpreting a well-typed program never fails, and all programs are type-checked before interpreting them), and *garbage-collected* (interpreting a well-typed program never results in *memory leaking*). The semantics of the language is specified formally by a set of *big-step* rules, each of them describing how to transform a *syntax pattern* of the language and a stack into a result stack.

(See *Michelson: the language of Smart Contracts in Tezos* for the full specification of the Michelson language.)

## Support for the elliptic curve construction BLS12-381

BLS12-381 is an elliptic curve construction introduced by Sean Bowe in 2017 for an upgrade of the Zcash protocol (see *BLS12-381: New zk-SNARK Elliptic Curve Construction*). BLS12-381 is a *pairing-equipped* curve construction that targets the 128-bit security level, and which is useful for implementing *signature aggregation schemes* and *zk-SNARK verifiers*. These and other schemes for *zero-knowledge proofs of knowledge* (zkPoK) have already been discussed in connection to BLS12-381 in *Adding Support for the Pairing-Equipped Elliptic Curve BLS12–381 to Tezos*.

Leaving technicalities that exceed the scope of this post aside, the BLS12-318 construction considers two groups $G_1$ and $G_2$ on related, but different elliptic curves. The two groups have a binary group operation (addition), an inverse operation (negation), and a scalar multiplication over the same finite field $F_r$. The construction also induces a bilinear *pairing operation*, which takes one element from each of $G_1$ and $G_2$, and maps this pair to an element of another related finite field $F_{q^{12}}$, thus efficiently embedding operations in the elliptic curve group into a finite field. The groups $G_1$ and $G_2$ are chosen specifically for fast computation of the pairing operation. For a more detailed account on elliptic curves and pairings see *Explore Elliptic Curve Pairings*.

Checking a BLS12-381 signature amounts to checking that the pairing operation maps two different pairs to the same element of the scalar field $F_{q^{12}}$. This check can done by *dividing* one of the pairings by the other---in the scalar field, division is defined as "multiplication by the inverse"---, and by checking that the result coincides with the *identity element* of $F_{q^{12}}$. By bilinearity of the pairing operation, and by the laws of the binomial product, this check can be implemented in terms of negation of group elements and product of scalars. More interestingly, checking the equality of *several couples of pairings* can be reduced to checking that the product of the pairings on a series of pairs coincides with the identity element. This is particularly useful when implementing signature aggregation schemes, which require to incrementally check several signatures in a time-effective manner.

The new types `bls12_381_g1`

and `bls12_381_g2`

represent elements of the $G_1$ and $G_2$ groups respectively, and the new type `bls12_381_fr`

represents elements of the scalar field $F_r$. Elements of `bls12_381_g1`

and `bls12_381_g2`

are compatible with the existing instructions `ADD`

(the binary group operation), `NEG`

(the inverse operation) and `MUL`

(the scalar multiplication with signature $G_x\times F_r\to G_x$, where $x$ is either 1 or 2). Elements of `bls12_381_g1`

and `bls12_381_g2`

can be compressed into elements of the new types `bls12_381_g1_compressed`

and `bls12_381_g2_compressed`

respectively. The new instructions `COMPRESS`

and `DECOMPRESS`

correspondingly mediate between the non-compressed and compressed elements of each group.

The new instruction `PAIRING_CHECK`

takes a list with pairs of `bls12_381_g1`

and `bls12_381_g2`

as elements, and checks that the product of their pairings is equal to the identity element of the field $F_{q^{12}}$, indicating the success of the pairing check with a `bool`

.

## More cryptographic hash algorithms

Two new cryptographic instructions have been added, `SHA3`

and `KECCAK`

, which implement the hash algorithms in the *Keccak family* that are detailed below.

Keccak is a family of algorithms designed for the NIST *Cryptographic Hash Algorithm Competition* from 2008-2010, which sought to create a new standardized hash algorithm that was significantly dissimilar in construction from earlier standards MD5, SHA-0, SHA-1 and SHA-2. The selected algorithm was a particular member of the Keccak family, later known as SHA3.

SHA3 now is a relatively ubiquitous cryptographic hash algorithm. SHA3 is not intended to replace SHA-2, and no significant attack on SHA-2 has been demonstrated to date; However, it is advantageous to have several algorithms available in order to be resistant to compromise of a single hash algorithm.

Keccak256 is another member of the Keccak family, remarkable for its pervasiveness in the Ethereum ecosystem. Keccak256 is a slightly earlier version of SHA3, and the algorithms differ only by choice of parameters.

The instructions`SHA3`

and `KECCAK`

take a string of bytes and retrieve the SHA3 (respectively the Keccak256) of those bytes.

It is noteworthy that Keccak256 is often erroneously referred to as "SHA3" in the Ethereum ecosystem; a vestigial inaccuracy, which has become unfortunately commonplace. However, sometimes "SHA3" does indeed refer to the SHA3 function proper. Diligence should be exercised as a result of this widespread misconception.

## Support for forbidden branches

The concept of *contract template* has been proposed as the means to implement financial interfaces for smart contracts, which define a set of basic entrypoints that are common to several contracts (see the FA1.2 of this *Tezos improvement proposal* for an example of such an interface). A *contract template* collects these common entrypoints by using a parameter of union type, and leaves place for additional entrypoints via a type variable in the parameter's type, and a branch in the code of the contract that processes the part of the parameter that corresponds to this type variable. This concept is illustrated by the following example taken from *Tezos issue #662*, where `p`

is the type variable for additional entrypoints and `doOther`

is the branch that implements them:

```
parameter or (int %callA) (or (nat %callB) p)
storage ...
code { UNPAIR; IF_LEFT {doA} { IF_LEFT {doB} {doOther} } }
```

Sometimes a contract provides no additional entrypoints, but this fact could not be reflected in the contract's type. The new type `never`

serves this purpose: using it in place of the type variable in the parameter's type forbids the use of any entrypoint different from the common ones, thus indicating that the contract interface has not been extended. The accompanying instruction `NEVER`

is used to fill the *forbidden branch* implementing such non-existing additional entrypoints. The instruction `NEVER`

receives a stack with a `never`

type on its top and returns a stack of arbitrary type. To wit, the code below forbids the additional entrypoints represented by `p`

in the aforementioned example:

```
parameter or (int %callA) (or (nat %callB) never)
storage ...
code { UNPAIR; IF_LEFT {doA} { IF_LEFT {doB} {NEVER} } }
```

The type `never`

is equivalent to the Empty type present in many programming languages and proof assistants (*a.k.a.* Zero, or False type), which is a type with no inhabitants. Since `never`

has no inhabitants, no value of this type is ever permitted to occur in a well-typed program. Notice that the code snippet above does not create any value of type `never`

, but merely *abstracts a value of such type* via the `parameter`

declaration.

The type `never`

is comparable, with an empty `COMPARE`

instruction.

## More comparable types

The types `key`

, `signature`

and `chain_id`

have been made comparable (see *Michelson: the language of Smart Contracts in Tezos* for a full description of those types). A comparable type has a compatible instruction `COMPARE`

that induces a total order on the values of the type. This is particularly useful since the values of comparable type are the only ones that can take part in collections where those values have to be unique and sorted, as is the case with the elements of a `set`

, and with the keys of a `map`

or of a `big_map`

.

## Voting Power Data

Two instructions have been added that allow Michelson contracts to operate with the voting power of bakers. The instruction `VOTING_POWER`

takes the key hash of a delegate and retrieves a natural that is equal to the number of rolls in the delegate's staking balance, as it appears in the delegate's entry in the voting listings. The voting listings, which are calculated at the beginning of each voting period, reflect each delegate's vote weight when emitting a Ballot operation. The instruction `TOTAL_VOTING_POWER`

retrieves a natural that is equal to the total number of rolls of the delegates in the voting listings, such that the relative vote weight of a delegate can be calculated by comparing the delegate's voting power with the total voting power.

Knowing a delegate's relative vote weight programmatically enables to perform early polling for preferences on protocol features, by deploying contracts that use the instructions `VOTING_POWER`

and `TOTAL_VOTING_POWER`

.

## General improvements

The new instruction `SELF_ADDRESS`

retrieves the address of the current contract, in a way similar to the sequence of instructions `SELF; ADDRESS`

. However, `SELF_ADDRESS`

is permitted to occur within lambdas, whereas `SELF; ADDRESS`

is not. This ability can be used to implement advanced mechanisms in which the address of the current contract is bound dynamically.

The new instruction `LEVEL`

retrieves the current block level.

Besides adding the instructions `SELF_ADDRESS`

and `LEVEL`

, the macro `UNPAIR`

has been promoted to an instruction with equivalent semantics.

* Written by *Álvaro García Pérez

*, c*

*ore developer and researcher at*Metastate*.*For feedback or questions, please do not hesitate to contact us : team@metastate.dev