description
update README to reflect coverage runs with tests
CScriptNum -> ScriptNum

"CScriptNum" is a purely bitcoind name. A more appropriate name is just
ScriptNum.
TxFormat is slightly more explanatory

It is slightly longer and less convenient, however "toTx" is slightly
misleading since we are not converting it "to a transaction", but rather to the
transaction format.
pass all but one relevant tx_valid, tx_invalid tests

Added tests to the script interpreter for all relevant tx_valid and tx_invalid
tests from bitcoin core. Note that most of these tests are relevant, but not
all are.  Some of the tests rely on checks that should not be performed by the
script interpreter, particularly those that rely on checks from
CheckTransaction in bitcoind. Those tests have been disabled. There is one
other test from tx_invalid that tests some combination of SIGHASH_ALL and
SIGHASH_ANOYONECANPAY which fails, and I'm fairly sure it should not fail. I
will fix that soon. The changes I've made to pass these tests are:

* CheckSignatureEncoding - does not decode signature unless flags are set
* findAndDelete - now also compare pushdata opcode (not sure if this is exactly
 equal to bitcoind code)
* catch exceptions around parsing signatures and pubkeys in CHECKSIG and
 CHECKMULTISIG
support ops with OP_ in the name

Bitcoind script strings allow "OP_" to be in the name, or not. This updates the
fromBitcoindString code to understand scripts with OP_ in the string. This is
presently only used in the interpreter tests, so that test is updated.
mocha "skip" failing test vector

So that it stands out and it is not easy to forget that it exists.
add remaining tx_invalid test

This test was failing and I had suspected there was something wrong with my
sighash code, however it turns out that was not the problem. This test actually
has one script that failes, and the other that succeeds. I had written the test
incorrectly, assuming that all scripts would fail. The fact that one succeeded
counfounded my test. There was nothing actually wrong with my sighash code or
script interpreter code, at least so far as I can tell.
add comments to move the tx_valid/invalid tests

The tx_valid and tx_invalid tests are being run in the script interpreter
tests, however they really rely on other checks that go beyond the script
interpreter. The tx_invalid checks, for instance, rely on the CheckTransaction
function in bitcoind, which I have not yet translated to javascript. Once I
create a txbuilder class, that is probably where the CheckTransaction
translation will go, and therefore these tests should really be moved to the
tests for the txbuilder. Once that happens, I can enabled the small handful of
disabled tests that rely on CheckTransaction.
v0.2.0