Conversation
|
@arthurgreef Thanks for the PR! It looks like there was a CI failure from It also looks like there may be some Clippy errors to address (it didn't run as the CI stopped after running |
f3fe4a1 to
af40b17
Compare
examples/ecdsa/circuit.rs
Outdated
| where | ||
| F: PrimeField<Repr = [u8; 32]>, | ||
| { | ||
| pub z_rx: F, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@arthurgreef do we need a separate field element that tracks is_infinity when representing ECC points in affine form?
examples/ecdsa/circuit.rs
Outdated
| |lc| lc + z_hash.get_variable(), | ||
| ); | ||
|
|
||
| let g = AllocatedPoint::alloc(cs.namespace(|| "G"), Some((self.gx, self.gy, false)))?; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It seems like we are setting is_infinity to false, shouldn't this be read from the pasta_curves affine representation of the point being sent here?
Also, does it make sense to wrap (x, y, is_infinity) in a struct so the number of arguments to these methods is more manageable?
4908f31 to
320feeb
Compare
|
Closing this pull request. It seems to have gone out of wack. I've submitted another PR. |
* Digest simplifications (microsoft#238) * remove unused digest computations * avoid a verifier having to recompute a digest * update crate version Restore digest computation and fix API inconsistency (microsoft#242) * Revert "Digest simplifications (microsoft#238)" This reverts commit 71ecb66. * upgrade neptune * make the public interface uniform wrt refs vs. copies * simplify prove_step * refactor: Adapt supernova RecursiveSNARK to Nova API changes - Updated `RecursiveSNARK` struct in `supernova/mod.rs` to include `z0_primary` and `z0_secondary` fields, simplifying method parameters. - Refactored `prove_step` method in `RecursiveSNARK` struct to leverage the new instance variables, `z0_primary` and `z0_secondary`, - Replaced all usages of `z0_primary` and `z0_secondary` in function calls with their respective instance variables. --------- Co-authored-by: Srinath Setty <[email protected]>
No description provided.