Skip to content
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

more BLS operations #266

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 24, 2023
Merged

more BLS operations #266

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 24, 2023

Conversation

arvidn
Copy link
Contributor

@arvidn arvidn commented Sep 14, 2023

add negate, scalar_multiply, hash_to_g1, from_integer to point types as well as hash_to_g2.

These operations are sufficient to make clvm_rs use this crate instead of bls12_381

@arvidn arvidn requested a review from Rigidity September 14, 2023 08:44
@coveralls-official
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 6183068964

  • 272 of 333 (81.68%) changed or added relevant lines in 2 files are covered.
  • No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.3%) to 90.764%

Changes Missing Coverage Covered Lines Changed/Added Lines %
chia-bls/src/public_key.rs 154 162 95.06%
chia-bls/src/signature.rs 118 171 69.01%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 6113022885: -0.3%
Covered Lines: 8835
Relevant Lines: 9734

💛 - Coveralls

@arvidn arvidn marked this pull request as ready for review September 15, 2023 07:48
Rigidity
Rigidity previously approved these changes Sep 15, 2023
@arvidn
Copy link
Contributor Author

arvidn commented Sep 18, 2023

it turns out there's some missing test coverage, especially of aggregate_pairing, but also some other failure cases. I'll add that before landing

@arvidn arvidn merged commit 5bca7d9 into main Sep 24, 2023
52 checks passed
@arvidn arvidn deleted the more-bls-operations branch September 24, 2023 18:16
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