New Python block cipher API, comments wanted

David Mertz, Ph.D. mertz at gnosis.cx
Tue Jan 28 23:53:03 EST 2003


Paul Rubin <phr-n2003b at NOSPAMnightsong.com> wrote previously:
|There's no PEP for the existing rotor module, for example.  A PEP for
|this seems to me like overkill.

The rotor module existed before the PEP process did.  If someone wanted
to introduce rotor today as a new addition, I would strongly advocate
that it not be added without a prior PEP.

|Anyway, so far at least, the actual crypto application developers who
|have looked at this module have either said it looks fine or else have
|suggested minor changes which are easy to incorporate.

Ahhh... minor changes!  Exactly why a PEP (or a revision of an existing
one) is necessary.  I am sure you are confident of the quality of your
code; in fact, there really *is not* a lot to go wrong with adding
cipher modes.  But sudden introductions of new APIs is not what makes
Python so good... careful consideration of features is.

|But such a delay means that useful, real-world applications that need
|the module will take longer to become widely deployable, etc.

Nope.  It means that real-world applications that want to utilize the
module will need to include it in their distribution archive.  That's
all.  A few extra bytes to distribute.

--
---[ to our friends at TLAs (spread the word) ]--------------------------
Echelon North Korea Nazi cracking spy smuggle Columbia fissionable Stego
White Water strategic Clinton Delta Force militia TEMPEST Libya Mossad
---[ Postmodern Enterprises <mertz at gnosis.cx> ]--------------------------






More information about the Python-list mailing list