Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
Add
UniScalarRng
#123Add
UniScalarRng
#123Changes from all commits
81ccc66
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure why we create a new RNG when we just want to create new random scalars from a given uniform RNG.
What we are attempting to achieve is to have a uniform implementation for
JubJubScalar
that takes a uniform sampler, not to create our own samples (that in the end will increase the type complexity of the stack).Why not just implement this as a function
JubJubScalar::random
orJubJubScalar::uniform_random
?I favor replacing the previous implementation since the uniform bits is a desirable property in any context.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure we need an iterator here. This will make it harder for the compiler to optimize. Being a small, fixed size array, why not just take the
next_u64
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ditto; unnecessary usage of iterators
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The returned value is a raw little-endian representation of the scalar limbs. This is not the expected serialized format, I wonder why we are doing it.
If we are to generate the limbs, we should probably send them directly to the scalar. We only have to return "bytes" because we opted to create a new RNG, when in fact what we need is to sample uniform 4-tuple
u64
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A more suitable approach would be to use a fuzzing library. Consider
quickcheck