Skip to content

Conversation

@dot-asm
Copy link
Collaborator

@dot-asm dot-asm commented Oct 24, 2025

No description provided.

@jtraglia
Copy link
Contributor

Typo in the title 😅

- blst_blst_from_{lb}e_bytes
+ blst_fp_from_{lb}e_bytes

@dot-asm dot-asm force-pushed the blst_fp_from_be_bytes branch from 10463fe to 2b9bf4b Compare October 26, 2025 12:33
@dot-asm
Copy link
Collaborator Author

dot-asm commented Oct 26, 2025

Typo in the title 😅

Thanks!

@dot-asm dot-asm changed the title exports.c: add blst_blst_from_{lb}e_bytes. exports.c: add blst_fp_from_{lb}e_bytes. Oct 26, 2025
@bellebaum
Copy link

This looks perfect :)
I actually prefer the generality here.

I don't know if you have any testing setup, but I did check some outputs of the big endian function against manual python-assisted calculations, and at least on my system I got what I expected given the code.

@dot-asm
Copy link
Collaborator Author

dot-asm commented Oct 27, 2025

I've tested big-endian variant as replacement for the inner loop in hash_to_field and then compared results to be equal for few oversize random inputs for big- and little-endian variants, naturally with reversed bytes in the inputs.

@dot-asm
Copy link
Collaborator Author

dot-asm commented Oct 27, 2025

Committed. Thanks.

@dot-asm dot-asm closed this Oct 27, 2025
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.

3 participants