Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Biguint-literal crate #83

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Biguint-literal crate #83

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

newpavlov
Copy link
Member

@tarcieri tarcieri closed this Feb 2, 2021
@tarcieri tarcieri deleted the biguint branch February 2, 2021 21:26
@newpavlov newpavlov restored the biguint branch February 6, 2021 07:55
@newpavlov
Copy link
Member Author

newpavlov commented Feb 6, 2021

I still need this branch and PR

@newpavlov newpavlov reopened this Feb 6, 2021
@tarcieri
Copy link
Member

tarcieri commented Feb 6, 2021

Err whoops, not sure what happened here. Sorry about that.

@tarcieri
Copy link
Member

tarcieri commented Jun 2, 2021

@newpavlov I think crypto-bigint might accomplish the same sort of goal as what's in this PR, but using const fn instead of a proc macro. Here's an example:

https://github.com/RustCrypto/traits/pull/645/files#diff-369e56ff85c2cd28f4a387c6a341ae8c5880633480cb4f629b30f9c8a79523c5R45-R46

@newpavlov
Copy link
Member Author

Yes, I've noticed that you've managed to implement const initialization and was pleasantly surprised that it is possible with the current version of const generics. I will close this PR after I migrate RustCrypto/elliptic-curves#218 to crypto-bigint. But I will have to start with learning more about how crypto-bigint is implemented, since I only have been able to take a cursory look at it before.

@tarcieri
Copy link
Member

FYI, I'll probably look at adding some basic support for field elements to crypto-bigint, although unfortunately const generics aren't quite powerful enough yet to model them the way I'd really like (i.e. with the field modulus expressed as a const generic)

They'll probably not be ideal for things like elements of the base field, but they should be fine for representing scalar fields.

@newpavlov newpavlov closed this Sep 13, 2021
@newpavlov newpavlov deleted the biguint branch September 13, 2021 19:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants