On Wed, Oct 18, 2000 at 01:58:18PM +0000, Marc Mutz wrote: > Alexander S A Kjeldaas wrote: > > > <snip> > > Although I think using separate header files is ok, I do not see an > > advantage in this case. Why optimize on an extremely remotely > > probable case - that the following happens: > > > > It's not for optimizing something, except the case of readable code. > There's a lot of redundancy in the source as is and that is bad for > maintainability. We already have a dozen ciphers and two hash functions > in the API, adding RIPEMD, Tiger and SHA-256, -384 and -512 is just a > matter of time. I just experienced what is takes to go through all > cipher files by hand and changing similar things in each of them. Ugh. > Don't want to do that for 20 ciphers and 10 digests. > Ok then.. let's remove the defines and wait with adding separate headers until someone wants them. astor -- Alexander Kjeldaas Mail: astor@xxxxxxx finger astor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for OpenPGP key. Linux-crypto: cryptography in and on the Linux system Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-crypto/
