OTC Vote: EVP init functions should accept an OSSL_PARAM array to set parameters.
tm at t8m.info
Tue Feb 2 11:31:49 UTC 2021
We discussed that within the call. We did not add the 'optional' word
because the meaning of it is convoluted with the parameter being really
optional (as in fn(a, b, ...)). That the caller can pass NULL as
OSSL_PARAM array pointer is already implicit.
On Tue, 2021-02-02 at 11:28 +0000, Dr. Matthias St. Pierre wrote:
> I recall that in our discussion the OSSL_PARAM array pointer was
> intended to be optional,
> i.e., NULL pointers allowed. Maybe the word 'optional' should be
> added as follows?
> EVP init functions should accept an *optional* OSSL_PARAM array to
> set parameters.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: openssl-project <openssl-project-bounces at openssl.org> On
> > Behalf Of Dr Paul Dale
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2021 10:18 AM
> > To: openssl-project at openssl.org
> > Subject: OTC Vote: EVP init functions should accept an OSSL_PARAM
> > array to set parameters.
> > topic: EVP init functions should accept an OSSL_PARAM array to set
> > parameters.
> > comment: This will mostly avoid calling the equivalent set_param
> > call.
> > Proposed by pauli.
> > Public: yes
> > opened: 2020-02-02
> > closed: 2020-02-02
> > accepted: yes (for: 8, against: 0, abstained: 1, not voted: 2)
No matter how far down the wrong road you've gone, turn back.
[You'll know whether the road is wrong if you carefully listen to your
More information about the openssl-project