From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,9a441a9594e85d08 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "Nick Roberts" Subject: Re: Bignum modular types in Ada95 Date: 1998/01/31 Message-ID: <01bd2e93$d5f33d00$LocalHost@xhv46.dial.pipex.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 320946266 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <34CE568C.55D7E23D@cl.cam.ac.uk> <34CF3E78.F816DB5@cl.cam.ac.uk> <34D082F9.ABEC0D3B@elca-matrix.ch> <34D11876.5059EDD4@cl.cam.ac.uk> <34D1CD35.8BEEAB7C@elca-matrix.ch> <34D1ED17.D788435@cl.cam.ac.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Organization: UUNet UK server (post doesn't reflect views of UUNet UK) Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-01-31T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Besides which the package implementation can always be used: it is not denied by providing built-in bignum support! -- == Nick Roberts ================================================ == Croydon, UK =========================== == ================ == Proprietor, ThoughtWing Software ========== == Independent Software Development Consultant ====== == Nick.Roberts@dial.pipex.com ==== == Voicemail & Fax +44 181-405 1124 === == == == I live not in myself, but I become == === Portion of that around me; and to me == ==== High mountains are a feeling, but the hum == ======= Of human cities torture. =========== -- Byron [Childe Harold] Markus Kuhn wrote in article <34D1ED17.D788435@cl.cam.ac.uk>... > Mats Weber wrote: > > > > > If we have arbitrary length string operations, arbitrary > > > length integer operations shouldn't be that much additional > > > hazzle, and the popularity that arithmetic with huge numbers > > > has gained through the numerous asymmetric cryptoalgorithms > > > out there (RSA, Diffie-Hellman, ElGamal, DSS, all the new > > > elliptic curve stuff, etc.) surely justifies the investment. > > > > Yes, but for all such applications, efficiency is so important that it must be > > part of the specification, and I think that if you get into coding such > > applications, then you will be much better off if you have complete control > > over your bignum algorithms. > > Not once there is hardware support available for such operations > and we still want to product strictly portable code.