Skip to content

Conversation

@arthurgreef
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@srinathsetty
Copy link
Collaborator

@arthurgreef Thanks for the PR!

It looks like there was a CI failure from cargo fmt check. Can you run cargo fmt on your fork and push a commit? (I tried doing so, but I don't have write access to your fork.)

It also looks like there may be some Clippy errors to address (it didn't run as the CI stopped after running cargo fmt). Note that the CI runs the following command: cargo clippy --all-targets --all-features -- -D warnings after cargo fmt success.

@arthurgreef arthurgreef force-pushed the arthurgreef/ecdsa branch 2 times, most recently from f3fe4a1 to af40b17 Compare July 12, 2022 03:06
@srinathsetty srinathsetty self-requested a review July 14, 2022 22:33
where
F: PrimeField<Repr = [u8; 32]>,
{
pub z_rx: F,
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@arthurgreef do we need a separate field element that tracks is_infinity when representing ECC points in affine form?

|lc| lc + z_hash.get_variable(),
);

let g = AllocatedPoint::alloc(cs.namespace(|| "G"), Some((self.gx, self.gy, false)))?;
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

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?

@arthurgreef
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this pull request. It seems to have gone out of wack. I've submitted another PR.

huitseeker added a commit to huitseeker/Nova that referenced this pull request Nov 3, 2023
* 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 <srinath@microsoft.com>
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.

2 participants