Circuit builder - verify proof should not require &self
#396
Labels
team:Core
Low Level Core Development Team (Rust)
Comments
CPerezz
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 4, 2021
Since these two functions didn't need `Self` or `self` and also were independent, we've been able to remove them from the trait. This closes #396 and also allows us to have a generic method that can verify Proofs of any `Circuit` without needing to have access to the type of it.
CPerezz
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Mar 4, 2021
Since these two functions didn't need `Self` or `self` and also were independent, we've been able to remove them from the trait. This closes #396 and also allows us to have a generic method that can verify Proofs of any `Circuit` without needing to have access to the type of it.
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Currently, the
Circuit::verify_prooftakes&mut self. That implies in some cases the circuit may need to instantiate default implementations to be able to verify proofs.That is not applicable because no concrete data from the circuit is required for the proof verification.
Proposed change
&mut selffromCircuit::verify_proofsignatureThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: