Duane,
I would like to speak up in favour of including your MD5 implementation in Squeak, along with the SHA which is there now. MD5 is used in a number of Internet authentication protocols, and this implemention seems to work quite well for me.
Mike
Mike Rutenberg wrote:
I would like to speak up in favour of including your MD5 implementation in Squeak, along with the SHA which is there now. MD5 is used in a number of Internet authentication protocols, and this implemention seems to work quite well for me.
I second this. I used MD5 in a prototype chat client emulating an existing C++ one and the MD5 stuff worked like a charm. BTW, it took only a few days to get the prototype running vs. don't ask the C++ guys how long it took them ;-)
Michael
Mike Rutenberg wrote:
I would like to speak up in favour of including your MD5 implementation in Squeak, along with the SHA which is there now. MD5 is used in a number of Internet authentication protocols, and this implemention seems to work quite well for me.
Michael Rueger wrote:
I second this. I used MD5 in a prototype chat client emulating an existing C++ one and the MD5 stuff worked like a charm. BTW, it took only a few days to get the prototype running vs. don't ask the C++ guys how long it took them ;-)
Well, it's certainly fine with me - but it's really up to SqC to decide what goes into the base image. I think that there's some feeling that all of the current cryptography support (SHA, MD5 and DES) should be somehow consolidated into a single plugin, but to date nobody's found the time to do that. This unfortunately includes me.
If anyone else is willing to take up the challenge, please step up!
-- Duane
=================================================== Duane Maxwell dmaxwell (at) entrypoint.com CTO http://www.entrypoint.com EntryPoint, Inc. (858)348-3040 FAX(858)348-3100
Information contained herein is my personal opinion and not necessarily that of EntryPoint. ===================================================
At 10:51 01.05.00 -0700, Duane Maxwell wrote:
Mike Rutenberg wrote:
I would like to speak up in favour of including your MD5 implementation in Squeak, along with the SHA which is there now.
Michael Rueger wrote:
I second this.
Well, it's certainly fine with me - but it's really up to SqC to decide what goes into the base image.
I know that SqC wants this stuff in the image but we first need a volunteer to unify the code. IMHO, if we add it, it should be done right. So is there any brave soul out there who wants to work on this?
bye -- Stefan Matthias Aust // Bevor wir fallen, fallen wir lieber auf
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Duane Maxwell -
mdr＠scn.org -
Michael Rueger -
Stefan Matthias Aust