-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
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
Clean up uses of coerceSize
#101
Comments
coerce-size
coerceSize
If we make this change now, are we happy that cryptol-specs will depend on a nightly build of Cryptol, rather than a formally tagged release? Put another way - should we create a release 3.2 of Cryptol before updating this repo? |
cryptol-specs/.github/workflows/ci.yml Line 13 in 049f57d
However, the CI overhaul in the roadmap plans to test I am okay with holding off on this ticket until the new CI is in place (we can start cutting tickets over here for that as well). |
OK... sounds good |
Oops, I missed the discussion on this issue about waiting to fix. I have a branch that adds all the fixes, I'll just leave it as a draft PR until we're ready to stabilize CI and the version of cryptol with this fix in it. See #107. |
This will still be useful for testing |
Discussed this internally and we came to the conclusion of releasing a new Cryptol version and having |
- I misread `max 1 n - 1` when making the previous change. Removes the `max`s that are obsoleted by the numeric constraint guards I added. - Adds docstrings for properties in `ntt` that I used to debug.
Now that GaloisInc/cryptol#1713 has been merged, some use cases of
coerceSize
should be able to be removed fromcryptol-specs
, particularly in ML-KEM, e.g.cryptol-specs/Primitive/Asymmetric/Cipher/ML-KEM/specification.cry
Line 198 in 049f57d
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: