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

p256: use impl_field_element! macro #635

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 4, 2022

Conversation

tarcieri
Copy link
Member

@tarcieri tarcieri commented Aug 4, 2022

Uses the same macro as p384 to define the FieldElement type.

Isolates core arithmetic functionality in a p256_64.rs module, with the goal of eventually producing a 32-bit implementation as well.

Also adds a p256_32.rs module which provides a skeleton of a 32-bit implementation, although most of the functionality is currently implemented in terms of 64-bit integers, with the goal of facilitating an incremental conversion to a 32-bit backend.

Uses the same macro as `p384` to define the `FieldElement` type.

Isolates core arithmetic functionality in a `p256_64.rs` module, with
the goal of eventually producing a 32-bit implementation as well.

Also adds a `p256_32.rs` module which provides a skeleton of a 32-bit
implementation, although most of the functionality is currently
implemented in terms of 64-bit integers, with the goal of facilitating
an incremental conversion to a 32-bit backend.
@tarcieri tarcieri merged commit cea8f60 into master Aug 4, 2022
@tarcieri tarcieri deleted the p256/use-impl-field-element-macro branch August 4, 2022 04:10
tarcieri added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2022
This applies a similar treatment from #635 to the scalar backend,
clearing the way to implement a proper 32-bit backend for both the base
and scalar fields.
tarcieri added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2022
This applies a similar treatment from #635 to the scalar backend,
clearing the way to implement a proper 32-bit backend for both the base
and scalar fields.
tarcieri added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2022
This applies a similar treatment from #635 to the scalar backend,
clearing the way to implement a proper 32-bit backend for both the base
and scalar fields.
tarcieri added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 4, 2022
This applies a similar treatment from #635 to the scalar backend,
clearing the way to implement a proper 32-bit backend for both the base
and scalar fields.
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.

1 participant