Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
- Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 336
Use new *Dirty traits from the digest crate#153
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
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Changes from all commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Jump to
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it could be worth to be consistent and use
digest::Output<Self>across all crates.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The reason I couldn't here is because it doesn't
impl Default, anddigest::Output(presently, at least) uses theDigesttrait:https://github.com/RustCrypto/traits/blob/master/digest/src/digest.rs#L96
It could potentially use
FixedOuputinstead.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hrmm, changing it to use
FixedOutputis not trivial... it means you can't use it withDigestbecause not allDigests necessarily implFixedOutput, and that kind of defeats the point.I think we should leave it as-is. That said, I think we can fix the version used in the macro.