lift_x returns a point, not a tuple

[sipa]

No description provided.

[sipa]

@jonasnick @real-or-random

[real-or-random]

I agree, that's somewhat weird.

• Maybe we should then also have an explicit Let P = (r, y). line in lift_x to make the construction of a point more explicit, and then return P in the end.
• Your suggestion somehow drops the information that -P is computed by negating y. Maybe

P = lift_x( ... )
If ...
    P' = (x(P), -y(P))
    Return P'
Return P

[sipa]

Is that necessary? We do plenty of EC operations already, and EC addition and multiplication aren't explained at that level of detail either.

[real-or-random]

Agreed.
(Now GitHub says you ant to merge 62 commit, maybe you screwed up your branch or there is again something wrong with GitHub here. No idea.).

[real-or-random]

Ah yeah, is it possible that you force-pushed bip-schnorr instead of bip-schnorr-patch? :D

[sipa]

Rebased.

[real-or-random]

ACK

[jnewbery]

ACK 7472c79

[sipa]

This doesn't really apply anymore after #55, but lift_x is now still defined as something returning a tuple, which is wrong.

[sipa]

Addressing this in #58.