Content deleted Content added
→Further F3 optimizations: These optimisations have been known for years. |
|||
Line 179:
::But yeah, since those variants do look a bit weird some kind of link to an explanation would probably be good but I don't find it that necessary. By the way, I just checked several very old SHA1 source codes I have lying around and I found all but one of the variants in those source codes. So apparently these optimisations have been known for years.
::--[[User:Davidgothberg|David Göthberg]] 14:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
:::Well, strictly, both are original research as long as they don't come from a source. But I didn't really give them a thought earlier, and they do appear quite straightforward boolean function optimizations. So I agree that they probably don't need to be sourced.
:::And by the way, why did you omit the 7th combination (b=1, c=1, d=0) from your proof? Although all these alternatives also produce consistent results in this case. I was first confused by this, as I assumed their equivalence was somehow data-dependent. -- [[User:Intgr|intgr]] 15:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
== Explanation ==
| |||