Clean up ECSM review nits#668
Conversation
Codex Code ReviewNo issues found in the PR diff. I reviewed the ECSM witness changes, shared Verification note: I attempted |
|
Benchmark Results for modified programs 🚀
|
Review: Clean up ECSM review nitsThis is a clean refactoring/cleanup PR. No security vulnerabilities, bugs, or performance issues found. R_BYTES correctness — Verified manually that R_BYTES = 3p: byte 0: 0x2F3=0x8D, byte 1: 0xFC3=0x2F4→0xF4 (carry 2), byte 4: 0xFE*3+2=0xFC, byte 32: carry 0x02. Consolidating the duplicate from ecdas.rs is correct. Carry offset constants — CARRY_OFFSET_X2=8160, CARRY_OFFSET_YG=16319, etc. are exact renames of pre-existing magic numbers with no value changes. The pub(crate) re-export of R_BYTES in ecdas.rs preserves all internal access (ecdas_tests.rs resolves it correctly). New tests
field.rs narrowed to cfg(test) + pub(crate) — Fp has no non-test callers; correct. LGTM. |
Stacked on #657.
Summary:
Out of scope:
Validation: