| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age |
... | |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
The lemma is currently admitted
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Now the _correct_and_bounded lemma goes through
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is https://coq.inria.fr/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=5205, Bogus "Error:
Wrong argument name: n." error message in 8.4, 8.5
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Preparation for reflective add_coordinates
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
I haven't found a good way to genericize the proofs of relatedness
things, mostly because Modules and functors are annoying.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is https://coq.inria.fr/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=5198, Inlining lets
breaks typechecking of [Definition]s
|
|
|
|
| |
Also, I meant 8.4pl2 in the previous commit, not 8.2
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
After | File Name | Before || Change
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2m53.12s | Total | 2m52.26s || +0m00.85s
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0m01.38s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Common | 0m43.51s || -0m42.12s
0m14.82s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/CommonBinOp | N/A || +0m14.82s
0m10.91s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/CommonUnOp | N/A || +0m10.91s
0m10.44s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/CommonUnOpWireToFE | N/A || +0m10.43s
0m06.42s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/CommonUnOpFEToWire | N/A || +0m06.41s
1m18.24s | Experiments/Ed25519 | 1m18.57s || -0m00.32s
0m07.97s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/Mul | 0m08.45s || -0m00.47s
0m07.89s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/Freeze | 0m07.84s || +0m00.04s
0m06.87s | Specific/GF25519Reflective | 0m06.92s || -0m00.04s
0m03.53s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/CarrySub | 0m03.63s || -0m00.10s
0m03.27s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/CarryAdd | 0m03.28s || -0m00.00s
0m03.18s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/CarryOpp | 0m03.15s || +0m00.03s
0m02.24s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/Unpack | 0m02.21s || +0m00.03s
0m02.19s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/Pack | 0m02.28s || -0m00.08s
0m02.16s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/Sub | 0m02.15s || +0m00.01s
0m02.14s | Specific/GF25519Bounded | 0m02.07s || +0m00.07s
0m02.07s | Experiments/Ed25519Extraction | 0m02.16s || -0m00.09s
0m01.99s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/Add | 0m01.81s || +0m00.17s
0m01.82s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/Opp | 0m01.78s || +0m00.04s
0m01.76s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified/GeModulus | 0m01.71s || +0m00.05s
0m00.97s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/CommonUnOpFEToZ | N/A || +0m00.97s
0m00.86s | Specific/GF25519Reflective/Reified | 0m00.75s || +0m00.10s
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We now have a more principled approach in many places, and some of the
tuple-specific reasoning has been filled in.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This hooks up the boundedness constraints on [freeze] in GF25519Bounded
to those in Ed25519.
|
|
|
|
| |
Grrrr, evars
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
We no longer admit the boundedness proofs (other than freeze); a
significant chunk of the boundedness proofs now line up nicely.
|
| |
|