Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Nit: Do not hardcode the hiding mode #2581

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: staging
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

vicsn
Copy link
Contributor

@vicsn vicsn commented Nov 29, 2024

Motivation

Found this while browsing through the code. We should not be hardcoding the hiding mode, but set it during a test/library invocation. This particular instance was harmless, but should be fixed to safeguard future development nonetheless.

Test Plan

No actual logic is changed worth testing.

A unit test failed, likely for an unrelated reason (parameter fetching), please retrigger 🙏

@raychu86
Copy link
Contributor

raychu86 commented Dec 5, 2024

Huh, why did the Varuna tests that used VarunaNonHidingMode not fail since we were hardcoding VarunaHidingMode?

@vicsn
Copy link
Contributor Author

vicsn commented Dec 6, 2024

Huh, why did the Varuna tests that used VarunaNonHidingMode not fail since we were hardcoding VarunaHidingMode?

Because the function we're calling, index_polynomial_labels_single, doesn't actually use anything related to the type. This PR does not change any runtime values.

It might make sense to move all of the pure functions in AHPForR1CS elsewhere, but as it is this PR is a pareto improvement for clarity.

Copy link
Contributor

@raychu86 raychu86 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants