phc-discussions - Re: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format (2)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <88A4F561-8BAD-414B-A287-2B66A3A5CB69@interlog.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 09:08:31 -0400
From: Richard Outerbridge <outer@...erlog.com>
To: discussions@...sword-hashing.net
Subject: Re: [PHC] Specification of a modular crypt format (2)

On 2015-10-09 (282), at 08:38:26, Alexander Cherepanov <ch3root@...nwall.com> wrote:
> 
> On 2015-10-09 15:18, Thomas Pornin wrote:
>>>> 		acc = (acc << 6) + (unsigned)d;
>>> 
>>> ...but this one seems entirely redundant:-)
>> 
>> This cast is for readability. Readability depends on who is doing the
>> reading, and, in this case, the cast is for me.  [….]
> 
> Sure. But in this case, there is no switching of signedness, both operands have "unsigned" type. Sorry, I don't see what an additional cast could achieve.

What could it possibly co$t?
__outer