We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
Imho crypto methods provided by nodejs should be used instead of the haxe(js) implementation. I guess they are faster and probably less error prone.
For haxe.crypto.Md5 this would look like:
package haxe.crypto; import js.node.Crypto; import haxe.io.Bytes; class Md5 { public static function encode( s : String ) : String { var h = Crypto.createHash( "md5" ); h.update( s ); return h.digest( "hex" ); } public static function make( b : Bytes ) : Bytes { var h = Crypto.createHash( "md5" ); h.update( b.getData() ); return Bytes.ofData( h.digest() ); } }
What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Don't know the internals of Haxe's way. But I think if the interface is the same we could be ok with that!
Sorry, something went wrong.
PR's welcome, but I'd like to see some comparison measurements
I think there's the same problem problem with this as described in #42
No branches or pull requests
Imho crypto methods provided by nodejs should be used instead of the haxe(js) implementation.
I guess they are faster and probably less error prone.
For haxe.crypto.Md5 this would look like:
What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: