RetroSearch Browse

Sat Oct 12 23:04:41 CEST 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-October/129497.html

On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:

> Am 12.10.2013 19:37, schrieb Antoine Pitrou:
> > On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 19:19:44 +0200
> > Christian Heimes <christian at python.org> wrote:
>
...

>  >> * add PBKDF2 to ``hashlib``
> >> * make ``hashlib`` a package and add PBKDF2 to a new ``hashlib.kdf``
> module
> >> * make ``hashlib`` a package and add PBKDF2 to a new ``hashlib.pbkdf2``
> >> module
>

agreed with any of these three.

> > Putting it in "hashlib" sounds fine. There's no reason to create a
> > myriad of small separate modules.
>
> Maybe it's a good idea to expose HMAC through hashlib as well, and
> deprecate
> the standalone module at some point?
>

that also makes sense...

I'd leave hmac.py around through at least 3.6 but going ahead and moving
the implementation into hashlib in 3.4 makes sense.

-gps
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20131012/b6536491/attachment.html>

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-October/129497.html below:

[Python-Dev] Right place for PBKDF2 wrapper