Intent-Based Execution vs Smart Contract Execution
In smart contract execution, txs define execution paths. A tx calls a contract, which calls another contract, which calls another contract, and so on. The resulting state can’t be known until this step-by-step execution flow completes.
Anoma’s intents work fundamentally differently. Instead of authorizing an execution path, intents directly indicate what they want to achieve. For example, instead of an Ethereum tx that says “I want to call the swap function in a Uniswap contract,“ an Anoma intent says “I want 1 more BTC and am willing to have 15 less ETH.” They directly describe an end-state and don’t care about the execution steps that need to be performed to get there.
While it may not be immediately evident, intent-centric execution removes a fundamental limitation that has been constraining the smart contract paradigm since its dawn; the need for a global order for execution.
To execute intents, we don’t need to order them. We only need ordering for verification, not execution. This leads to massive improvements in scalability, privacy, and UX.
Tune in to our recent privacy report https://members.delphidigital.io/reports/everybody-needs#anoma to hear more on this
