On 5/23/2014 3:43 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
> OK, so let's run with the idea that at some point crypto RNGs will be a
> submodule of std.random.
>

So to recap my understanding of it:

An initial PR for Hash_DRBG being struct-based and directly part of "std.random", and then the submodule and conversion to class being part of your std.random2?

On 24/05/14 19:46, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> An initial PR for Hash_DRBG being struct-based and directly part of
> "std.random"

I think that's up to you.  I don't want to hold you back here, but equally, I feel that crypto functionality probably should be prototyped in an experimental module before being finalized in the standard library.

It's something that's too important to get right (and properly reviewed).

On 5/24/2014 5:19 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 24/05/14 19:46, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> An initial PR for Hash_DRBG being struct-based and directly part of
>> "std.random"
>
> I think that's up to you.  I don't want to hold you back here, but
> equally, I feel that crypto functionality probably should be prototyped
> in an experimental module before being finalized in the standard library.
>

Perhaps. In any case, I've tossed up a PR for it (it contains a few changes since the latest DAuth version of it). Further HashDRBG discussion should probably go there:

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2208

"Destroy"

> It's something that's too important to get right (and properly reviewed).