On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Mobile Mouse <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jan 3, 2015, at 23:16 , Jeffrey Walton <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Mobile Mouse <[email protected]> wrote: >>> And I’d be happy enough with the existing implementations. Because working >>> with Dan’s code wasn’t all that great in my experience. >> +1. Anyone who has complained about OpenSSL or Crypto++ has probably >> not had the pleasure of NaCl. (Is there any documentation yet?) > > :-) I’m not aware of any docs worth talking about. > > So back to my point: let’s keep Crypto++ as is (plus additional algorithms of > course), without taking anything from NaCl. > Yeah, good point.
-- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Crypto++ Users" Google Group. To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected]. More information about Crypto++ and this group is available at http://www.cryptopp.com. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crypto++ Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
