On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 05:20:14PM +0000, David Rush wrote: > Bengt Kleberg <eleberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > since most cryptographical > > algorithms use not integers, but arrays of bytes, > > This opens up another whole can of worms, since Scheme doesn't have > bytes. This is one of my pet peeves. I'm not terribly sure that going > down this road is a good idea. > > > perhaps a list (of specified length), with integers 0-255 as items, > > would be the most versatile value of such a procedure. > > Except that you can already generate range-limited integers, so I > think there's no real loss here. Good point. An implementation could convert a large random integer into a stream of bytes for this sort of application. Scott
Attachment:
pgpAo6WjYTG1T.pgp
Description: PGP signature