Re: [PATCH] COMP128v23 improvements

Hi Max,

There are definitely things weird in that patch :

- You double declare the same function - Why replace #defined constant by hardcoded numbers ? - Speaking about readability :

kc[6] = 4 * (kc[6] >> 2);

isn't the most obvious way to do kc[6] &= 0xfc;

Cheers,

Sylvain

On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 6:47 PM, ☎ Max.Suraev@fairwaves.ru wrote:

Hello.

I've got rid of unnecessary cycle and to made difference between v2 and v3 more visible: v2 is basically just v3 with last bits of Kc zeroed. Also - small readability improvements.

Also I've added test suite with test vectors from original python implementation.

-- best regards, Max, http://fairwaves.ru