[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP3198E1537DC06D484BA83F9FDAF0@phx.gbl>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 02:33:57 +0100
From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Handling of hashes with different iteration counts
On 01/29/2014 10:10 PM, magnum wrote:
> On 2014-01-29 21:31, Frank Dittrich wrote:
>> Defining an array of functions is one way to do it.
>> Defining a single function with one more parameter (id of tunable cost)
>> is another one.
>
> Another one is a single function that returns [a pointer to] an array of
> uint: If you don't have any notion of variable cost, the array is {0} or
> perhaps the pointer is NULL. If you have it, array can be {iter, 0} or
> {t_cost, m_cost, 0} and so on with virtually no limit.
And then one of the formats decides to return an array of a different
size than usual, under rare, hard to reproduce circumstances?
No, thanks. I really don't want to think about such situations.
If a format method is either NULL or returns a single unsigned int
value, that's easy to handle. The worst case that can happen is I report
bogus differences if a format is seriously broken.
Frank
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
