Yes I understand that's how it works, but I don't get why it's important. Surely you could double spend an output as long as you don't exceed its value; and that looks easily verifiable.
Ah, my bad. Sorry if I was being condescending in my previous reply then.
I suspect it was a design decision, yeah. If outputs could be spent multiple times then you'd need to traverse the chain of outputs backwards to see how much an output has left in it. Bitcoin's implementation is less complex and more elegant, imo.
I suspect it was a design decision, yeah. If outputs could be spent multiple times then you'd need to traverse the chain of outputs backwards to see how much an output has left in it. Bitcoin's implementation is less complex and more elegant, imo.