Adam Langley <agl@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > However, as I'm not a git developer, I've no opinion on whether the > cost of carrying implementations of these functions is worth the speed > vs using SHA-256, which can be assumed to be supported everywhere > already. Thanks. My impression from this thread is that even though fast may be better than slow, ubiquity trumps it for our use case, as long as the thing is not absurdly and unusably slow, of course. Which makes me lean towards something older/more established like SHA-256, and it would be a very nice bonus if it gets hardware acceleration more widely than others ;-)