From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Hartwig Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: About Guile crypto support Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 12:18:57 +0800 Message-ID: References: <1359896146.2754.19.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <871ucvof60.fsf@gnu.org> <1360032192.2754.61.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <87mwvisqwj.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1360124341 4937 80.91.229.3 (6 Feb 2013 04:19:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 04:19:01 +0000 (UTC) To: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 06 05:19:22 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U2wTi-0005Kj-90 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 05:19:22 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52966 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2wTP-0007x8-AF for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:19:03 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52847) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2wTM-0007x3-3b for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:19:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2wTK-0007RE-MZ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:19:00 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ia0-x234.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4001:c02::234]:60906) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U2wTK-0007R6-I6 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:18:58 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ia0-f180.google.com with SMTP id f27so1074664iae.11 for ; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:18:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NoMYv2YcuarkBytnwkV7sopk7cJYzAZPey+F5L6+1gY=; b=AxcKIGHrRR9+9kKpW9pgY3Ij/ouq3u6klU/xe1//LlM+hANP72o5lI1q6GfXqr45IO edMHIV0NmOrN1s2uKhqqtbPCZJSF1bACY1JGiSxs4N9YL33B+2miy/K6OzxeC1anjQKK b3/UI/oDls4y24R6dHl8Vq6P0m7wa0vFws2eDSLx12YochV0FRSKNopmKE3B7VEyzruL tQDnU/iuaD01o0ou2c3kStD/4xYJu8+a1lQsRb1rK0W7yBCYrTKuJLiicQQn20yQXSrY 5kR7KK4l7wMhRUyoKjAcVPoXyb5DiO+Oqa7dXcY8XxJg1CmAv+GzQtjvZDy04kiqjgjT l6BQ== X-Received: by 10.50.40.131 with SMTP id x3mr3350076igk.10.1360124337477; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:18:57 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.64.76.51 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 20:18:57 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87mwvisqwj.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4001:c02::234 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:15687 Archived-At: On 5 February 2013 23:48, Ludovic Court=C3=A8s wrote: >> The gcrypt-guile project is doing so, I'll help it if I can. >> But my original thought is orthogonal with gcrypt-guile, just put some >> common digest algorithm in libguile rather than a full-stack crypto-lib. > > We could actually use the Gnulib crypto modules. There=E2=80=99s a > duplication/convenience trade-off: we=E2=80=99d provide useful functional= ity by > default, at the expense of duplicating C code in our tarballs (2500 SLOC > for Gnulib=E2=80=99s sha*.[ch] and md5.[ch].) > > Opinions? Avoiding duplication and feature creep /in the core/ is highly desirable. Guildhall makes it convenient enough to pull in additional features; guile-lib has md5 and industria provides also sha and others. A small core with addons has some obvious benefits, for the platform. Maintainers may disagree, though I notice that historic choices to include some modules (such as sxml, web) in the core were made before the advent of Guildhall. I wonder where these modules would reside if they were introduced in the current situation =E2=80=A6? > > I think I=E2=80=99d be more inclined to have good bindings in libgcrypt p= roper, Yes, this solution will have many benefits. The currently available bindings are, well, not so great. However, the API is small enough that building a proper set will not take much effort. Curiously, some parts make use of S-expressions. Regards