Hi,
On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 at 12:53, Mikhail Glushenkov
If it doesn't result in too much of a slowdown, I think it would make sense to do this change. I'd recommend making the choice between ed25519/eccrypto configurable via a flag so that we could compare the two. I'm cc:ing Edsko, who is the main author of hackage-security.
Looking closer at eccrypto, I can identify the following issues: 1) eccrypto has a larger dependency footprint than ed25519, which only depends on GHC boot libraries 2) ed25519 is much better documented 3) eccrypto is quite new and not as mature as ed25519, which is based on the reference implementation However, I still think that we could accept a patch adding support for eccrypto as a compile-time option (not enabled by default).