* md5 and sha1 signatures
@ 2011-05-26 9:38 Leo
2011-05-27 0:53 ` Stefan Monnier
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Leo @ 2011-05-26 9:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: emacs-devel
Hello all,
Since there is only one user of sha1's BINARY arg namely canlock-sha1 in
the source tree, I wonder if it is worthwhile to make md5 and sha1 have
similar signature:
(md5 OBJECT &optional START END CODING-SYSTEM NOERROR BINARY)
(sha1 OBJECT &optional START END CODING-SYSTEM NOERROR BINARY)
What do you think?
Leo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: md5 and sha1 signatures
2011-05-26 9:38 md5 and sha1 signatures Leo
@ 2011-05-27 0:53 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-27 3:12 ` Leo
2011-05-27 8:29 ` Tassilo Horn
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Monnier @ 2011-05-27 0:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leo; +Cc: emacs-devel
> Since there is only one user of sha1's BINARY arg namely canlock-sha1 in
> the source tree, I wonder if it is worthwhile to make md5 and sha1 have
> similar signature:
> (md5 OBJECT &optional START END CODING-SYSTEM NOERROR BINARY)
> (sha1 OBJECT &optional START END CODING-SYSTEM NOERROR BINARY)
> What do you think?
I don't think it's worth the trouble.
Stefan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: md5 and sha1 signatures
2011-05-27 0:53 ` Stefan Monnier
@ 2011-05-27 3:12 ` Leo
2011-05-27 8:29 ` Tassilo Horn
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Leo @ 2011-05-27 3:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: emacs-devel
On 2011-05-27 08:53 +0800, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Since there is only one user of sha1's BINARY arg namely canlock-sha1 in
>> the source tree, I wonder if it is worthwhile to make md5 and sha1 have
>> similar signature:
>
>> (md5 OBJECT &optional START END CODING-SYSTEM NOERROR BINARY)
>> (sha1 OBJECT &optional START END CODING-SYSTEM NOERROR BINARY)
>
>> What do you think?
>
> I don't think it's worth the trouble.
>
>
> Stefan
OK.
Leo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: md5 and sha1 signatures
2011-05-27 0:53 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-27 3:12 ` Leo
@ 2011-05-27 8:29 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-05-27 12:35 ` Stefan Monnier
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tassilo Horn @ 2011-05-27 8:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Monnier; +Cc: Leo, emacs-devel
Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>> Since there is only one user of sha1's BINARY arg namely canlock-sha1
>> in the source tree, I wonder if it is worthwhile to make md5 and sha1
>> have similar signature:
>
>> (md5 OBJECT &optional START END CODING-SYSTEM NOERROR BINARY)
>> (sha1 OBJECT &optional START END CODING-SYSTEM NOERROR BINARY)
>
>> What do you think?
>
> I don't think it's worth the trouble.
Where's the big trouble, if there's only one user right now?
At least, all the command line tools `md5sum', `sha1sum', `sha224sum',
`sha256sum', `sha384sum', and `sha512sum' have the exact same options
and meanings. So I don't see a valid reason to have different lisp
signatures, especially if there's a chance that other algorithms might
be added in the future.
Bye,
Tassilo
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-05-27 12:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-05-26 9:38 md5 and sha1 signatures Leo
2011-05-27 0:53 ` Stefan Monnier
2011-05-27 3:12 ` Leo
2011-05-27 8:29 ` Tassilo Horn
2011-05-27 12:35 ` Stefan Monnier
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.