It seems like a good idea to refactor as a single class. However, even with a single class that can handle multiple key sizes, it seems redundant to have a #keySize: method, when the size of the key can be easily determined in #key: . It would make sense to make this change in Rijndael, and have AES inherit it.
With respect to #blockSize:, it might be better to throw an exception (eg: 'AES does not support multiple block sizes; use Rijndael instead') so that the user is educated, rather than assuming that the method does something when it really doesn't.
Cheers, Josh
On Nov 24, 2006, at 9:17 PM, Cerebus wrote:
On 11/24/06, cerebus2@gmail.com cerebus2@gmail.com wrote:
Added AES192 and overloaded the blockSize: and keySize: methods with do-nothings (is there a better way to do this?) since they make no sense for AES. Part of me is thinking that these should be a single class with keySize selection at instance creation. Comments welcome."!
I'm also working on a couple of tests, but I'll note that I threw a couple of FIPS 197 and RFC3602 test vectors at these classes and they came out fine.
The more I think about it the more I think I'll refactor as a single class.
-- Tim _______________________________________________ Cryptography mailing list Cryptography@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ cryptography