feat: implement multi-message-id feature#375
Conversation
7947444 to
ca42628
Compare
Benchmark for 836d7b7Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 836d7b7Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 204b974Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 204b974Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 08586b5Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 4dde7dfClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 08586b5Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 4dde7dfClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for b875d2fClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for b875d2fClick to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
2f3ba9f to
aa47df7
Compare
Benchmark for 2fe5b69Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 2fe5b69Click to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
Benchmark for 7622a9cClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 7622a9cClick to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
Benchmark for ffc21eaClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for ffc21eaClick to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
Benchmark for 7d58e73Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 7d58e73Click to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
Benchmark for f8dbb16Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for a2969bdClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for da3fd07Click to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
Benchmark for da3fd07Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 550cdc6Click to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
Benchmark for 550cdc6Click to view benchmark
|
Wonderful! Thanks. |
seemenkina
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
also please check merge conflict
Yes, I’ll also open another sub-PR when rebasing the partial proof generation PR into this to make it easier to review. |
Benchmark for 6b01d1cClick to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for 6b01d1cClick to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
seemenkina
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you, great job!
### Changes - Updated binary resources after auditing the new [circom circuit](https://github.com/vinhtc27/circom-rln/tree/multi-message-id/circuits) and updated the root README. - Renamed all related partial_proof.rs files to a single name (no changes compared to master). - Added test cases and included missing partial proof methods in the FFI and Nim example. - Added a version byte when serializing `RLNPartialWitnessInput` and `PartialProof`. - Merged the partial proof feature from `master` into the `multi-message-id` PR.
Benchmark for eb80818Click to view benchmark
|
Benchmark for eb80818Click to view benchmark
|
|
Coverage report uploaded. Download HTML Report |
Description
RLNWitnessInputandRLNProofValuesinto struct/enum (SingleV1/MultiV1) to cleanly support both standard and multi-message-id modes.RLNProofandRLNWitnessInput.ProtocolErrorwith new variants:EmptyMessageIds,DuplicateMessageIds,MissingSelectorUsed,NoActiveSelectorUsed, andFieldLengthMismatch.MAX_OUTvalue directly from the graph file instead of hardcoding.message_ids,selector_used,path_elements,identity_path_indexin proof gen api.max_out_4) for tree depth 10 and 20; removed tree depth 16 and 24.multi-message-idfeature flag.Testing
Checklist
run-coveragelabel to this PR to enable it.