You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The API exposes modules D, I, and ID with generic functions. It seems redundant. Why not just have generic functions?
Considering the lack of conversion functions from string to encoded or hash, it seems that modules D, I or ID seems not usable in practice.
For the generic functions, Why does the hash function return both a hash and an encoded datatype? It seems only the second one can be used with verify.
More generally, what are the differences between a hash and encoded? Why not just use one datatype?
I am wondering why the hash function takes an encoded_len argument. It seems that this value comes from the function encoded_len. Wouldn't be simpler to not expose encoded_len and let the function hash compute this length by itself?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I have some questions regarding the API:
D
,I
, andID
with generic functions. It seems redundant. Why not just have generic functions?encoded
orhash
, it seems that modulesD
,I
orID
seems not usable in practice.hash
function return both ahash
and anencoded
datatype? It seems only the second one can be used withverify
.hash
andencoded
? Why not just use one datatype?hash
function takes anencoded_len
argument. It seems that this value comes from the functionencoded_len
. Wouldn't be simpler to not exposeencoded_len
and let the functionhash
compute this length by itself?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: