Skip to content
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

Ed25519 builtins for Haskell #4717

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 27, 2024
Merged

Ed25519 builtins for Haskell #4717

merged 3 commits into from
Feb 27, 2024

Conversation

dolio
Copy link
Contributor

@dolio dolio commented Feb 23, 2024

This PR implements the Ed25519 builtins for #4709 in the Haskell interpreter.

I added a simple transcript that signs some bytes and verifies the signature. The secret/public keys are just an arbitrary pair that I generated for the test (despite the implementation only checking that the keys have the right length, you can't just use arbitrary byte strings).

I figured this was the more important part of the feature request, so the racket implementation is on hold until someone else gets to it, or I finish fixing the base tests on racket.

@dolio dolio requested a review from pchiusano February 23, 2024 23:11
@aryairani
Copy link
Contributor

We'll also need to get the two functions and the type added to base.

@aryairani
Copy link
Contributor

Needs one more trunk merge and rerun transcripts due to a different merge to trunk just now. I’ll try to get to it if you don’t have it handy.

# Conflicts:
#	unison-src/transcripts-using-base/all-base-hashes.output.md
@aryairani aryairani added the ready-to-merge Apply this to a PR and it will get merged automatically once CI passes and 1 reviewer has approved label Feb 27, 2024
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 8da9370 into trunk Feb 27, 2024
7 checks passed
@mergify mergify bot deleted the topic/ed25519 branch February 27, 2024 01:43
@mergify mergify bot removed the ready-to-merge Apply this to a PR and it will get merged automatically once CI passes and 1 reviewer has approved label Feb 27, 2024
@etorreborre
Copy link
Contributor

@dolio @aryairani pending the implementation of #4709 for RSA, would it be possible to do the same for RSA signatures?

@aryairani
Copy link
Contributor

aryairani commented May 8, 2024

@etorreborre "the same" meaning... adding a test for verifying RSA signatures?

Edit: Oh, meaning adding builtins for RSA signatures

@etorreborre
Copy link
Contributor

Yes, exactly.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants