a013700527 Replace uses of `chunks_exact` with `as_chunks` (Martin Habovstiak)
Pull request description:
This is now ready for review.
In the past we've been using `chunks_exact` because const generics were unstable but then, when they were stabilized we didn't use `as_chunks` (or `array_chunks`) since they were unstable. But the instability was only because Rust devs don't know how to handle `0` being passed in. The function is perfectly implementable on stable. (With a tiny, easy-to-understand `unsafe` block.) `core` doesn't want to make a decision for all other crates yet but we can make it for our own crates because we know that we simply never pass zero. (And even if we did, we could just change the decision.)
It also turns out there's a hack to simulate `const {}` block in our MSRV, so we can make compilation fail early.
This commit adds an extension trait to internals to provide the methods, so we no longer have to use `chunks_exact`. It also cleans up the code quite nicely.
Previous unresolved question, leaving for reference:
> One issue with this change is that the names collide which could lead to hard error in future Rust versions. How do we solve it?
> * ignore and just backport the fix once that actually happens
> * rename the methods to something reasonable (e.g. `as_array_chunks`) - this risks that they'll rename the methods to the same thing by accident and it'll break anyway
> * rename the methods to something silly (`bitcoin_as_chunks`) - yeah, the risk above is not there but then we have silly-looking code.
We've decide to just rename the methods to something that won't possibly collide.
ACKs for top commit:
tcharding:
ACK a013700527
apoelstra:
ACK a01370052715b6733f07011f28944105493bda63; successfully ran local tests; nice!
Tree-SHA512: cc3359518f97e510da5ee9a33495e26c338bfc3e4162aaffcc72ed9c7daad0daf5e9ca3d23bce50877b0d3881792e98e28d21174a4426bb01281f12285ce08d1
In the past we've been using `chunks_exact` because const generics were
unstable but then, when they were stabilized we didn't use `as_chunks`
(or `array_chunks`) since they were unstable. But the instability was
only because Rust devs don't know how to handle `0` being passed in. The
function is perfectly implementable on stable. (With a tiny,
easy-to-understand `unsafe` block.) `core` doesn't want to make a
decision for all other crates yet but we can make it for our own crates
because we know that we simply never pass zero. (And even if we did, we
could just change the decision.)
It also turns out there's a hack to simulate `const {}` block in our
MSRV, so we can make compilation fail early.
This commit adds an extension trait to internals to provide the methods,
so we no longer have to use `chunks_exact`. It also cleans up the code
quite nicely.
Add a standalone `hash` function that is a drop in replacement for
`GeneralHash::hash`. Do not add it to `hmac` - this is in parity with
the current code because `Hmac` does not implement `GeneralHash::hash`.
Use the new function in `bitcoin` removing all occurrences of
`GeneralHash` from `bitcoin`.
In `hashes` replace usage of `GeneralHash::hash` with the new `hash`
function.
We would like to do away with the `GeneralHash` trait. Currently we
bound `Hmac` and `HmacEngine` on it but this is unnecessary now that we
have added `HashEngine::finalize` and `HashEngine::Hash`.
Bound the `HmacEngine` on `HashEngine` (which has an associated `Hash`
type returned by `finilalize`).
Bound `Hmac` type on `T::Hash` where `T` is `HashEngine`.
Includes some minor shortening of local variable names around hmac
engine usage.
Note this means that `Hmac` no longer implements `GeneralHash`.
Add an associated const `Hash` to the `HashEngine` trait. Also add a
`finalize` method that converts the engine to the associated hash.
For now just use the existent `from_engine` stuff. We can refactor
later.
We are trying to make the `hashes` crate easier to read and also
possibly parseable by machines to see what is different where.
Move the test and bench code into separate files. Make special effort to
keep formatting as is so the diff is easier to review. We will run the
formatter in the next patch.
Internal change only.
There are five modules in `hashes` that implement cryptography (i.e.
have a `process_block` function). For each of them create a new
submodule called `crypto` and move the code there.
Code organisational refactor only, no logic changes.
In preparation for removing a bunch of macros move all the modules to
`<mod>/mod.rs`.
Do so by running the following shell:
```bash
for mod in hash160 ripemd160 sha1 sha256 sha256d sha256t \
sha384 sha512 sha512_256 siphash24 hkdf hmac; do
mkdir $mod
mv "$mod.rs" "$mod/mod.rs"
done
```
Internal change only.
todaymoon
Fmt Bot
merge-script
Martin Habovstiak
Tobin C. Harding
Jamil Lambert, PhD