Closed armfazh closed 4 years ago
Is this change necessary? It seems like sgn0
is complicated enough and the description is long enough that a separate sub-section makes sense...
sgn0
is complicated enough and the description is long enough that a separate sub-section makes sense...
it is not entirely necessary, but it doesn't hurt to revisit again. Thumbs up/down?
Hmm, I think it's a big enough chunk that it's clearer in its own subsection, so I guess I'd vote against this change.
I think it should also stay separate.
Are we OK leaving Section 4.1 as-is?
The description of sgn0 deserves its own section.
In the past section 4.1 descried two sgn0 variants. Now there is only one, so I merged into section 4.
It also reorders items of section 4, first functions on bit strings followed by operations on field elements. (the reverse order is interesting too).