On October 29, 2003 03:35 pm, Nils Larsch wrote: > On Tuesday 28 October 2003 05:44, Geoff Thorpe wrote: > ... > > > inconsistent state. BTW: my definition of a consistent state for a > > bignum x is for it to be invariant under bn_fix_top(). It's a > > what about: x is invariant under bn_fix_top && x.top <= x.max > (<=> invariant under bn_fix_top and bn_check_top shouldn't fail).
Sure. As I mentioned in the post, I am only interested for now in x.d and x.top, because that's where there are currently "legal bugs". :-) OTOH: what you're referring to are outright bugs. However, I could certainly see us adding those types of checks into the debugging macros anyway in case it crunches some bugs along the way too. I've got a few other things in my checkouts to clear up first, but I'll try and isolate my debugging stuff and post a patch in a day or two. Cheers, Geoff -- Geoff Thorpe [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.geoffthorpe.net/ ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
