Since the number of rounds has nothing to do with the pointer width of the target CPU, a more concrete type like u32 should probably be used. This is unfortunately a breaking change.
I agree a u32 would probably be better. That's what we typically use for round counts in other crates. A breaking change is no problem: we're in the middle of a breaking change cycle.
Sha256Params::new
Since the number of rounds has nothing to do with the pointer width of the target CPU, a more concrete type like
u32
should probably be used. This is unfortunately a breaking change.