The review of std.hash package

[Regan Heath]

On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 14:50:22 +0100, Chris Cain <clcain at uncg.edu> wrote:

> On Wednesday, 8 August 2012 at 13:38:26 UTC,  
> travert at phare.normalesup.org (Christophe Travert) wrote:
>> I think the question is: is std.hash going to contain only
>> message-digest algorithm, or could it also contain other hash functions?
>> I think there is enough room in a package to have both message-digest
>> algorithm and other kinds of hash functions.
>
> Even if that were the case, I'd say they should be kept separate.  
> Cryptographic hash functions serve extremely different purposes from  
> regular hash functions. There is no reason they should be categorized  
> the same.

I don't think there is any reason to separate them.  People should know  
which digest algorithm they want, they're not going to pick one at random  
and assume it's "super secure!"(tm).  And if they do, well tough, they  
deserve what they get.

"std.digest" can encompass all message digest algorithms, whether secure  
or not.

We could create a 2nd level below "secure" or "crypto" or similar if we  
really want, but I don't see much point TBH.

R

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/