On Feb 28, 2017, at 6:49 PM, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote: > > On 2/28/17, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote: >> >> Should the SHA3 hashes be SHA3-224 or >> SHA3-256? In my view, the extra computation and storage overhead for >> SHA3-256 is minimal and should not present a barrier. However, the >> extra 8 characters of hash from SHA3-256 do seem to introduce UI >> challenges. > > Who says we have to display all 64 digits of a SHA2-256 hash in the > UI?
That’s another way around it. I only suggested the “query terminal width” option for those who run their terminals at > 80 columns. (The weirdos.) _______________________________________________ fossil-dev mailing list fossil-dev@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-dev
