| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] |
hello Morgon, On Monday 29 May 2006 09:35, Morgon Kanter wrote: > Hello, > > I'm currently in the process of trying to add block ciphers to GNU > Crypto, and I've run across something I've found to be a bit odd. > > Every block cipher's function encryptBlock() and decryptBlock() call > the functions encrypt() and decrypt(), as defined in the > BaseBlockCipher class, which every block cipher extends. However, > encrypt() and decrypt() are left to be defined to the children. So, > would it make sense to add something like: > > protected abstract void encrypt(parameters); > protected abstract void decrypt(parameters); > > to the BaseBlockCipher class? It just seems to me like a strange > omission. in a way that's what BaseCipher does by implementing both IBlockCipher (the [encrypt|decrypt]Block operations) and IBlockCipherSpi (the [encrypt|decrypt] operations). cheers; rsn
Attachment:
pgpw4z7W3RYRq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ gnu-crypto-discuss mailing list gnu-crypto-discuss@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-crypto-discuss
[Home] [Gnu Classpath] [Linux Kernel] [Linux Cryptography] [Fedora] [Fedora Directory] [Red Hat Development] [Red Hat 9 Bible] [Fedora Bible] [Red Hat 9] [Network Security Reading]
|
![]() |