QM31

[spapinistarkware]

This change is 

[spapinistarkware]

• QM31 #4 👈
• MerkleVerifier #3 : 1 other dependent PR (#6 )
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

Join @spapinistarkware and the rest of your teammates on Graphite

[shaharsamocha7]

Reviewed 5 of 5 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 2 unresolved discussions (waiting on @spapinistarkware)

---

stwo_cairo_verifier/src/fields/qm31.cairo line 16 at r1 (raw file):

#[generate_trait]
impl QM31Impl of QM31Trait {
    fn inverse(self: QM31) -> QM31 {

should fail on zero. Is it ok to ignore that?

Code quote:

fn inverse(self: QM31) -> QM31 {

---

stwo_cairo_verifier/src/fields/qm31.cairo line 70 at r1 (raw file):

pub impl CM31IntoQM31 of core::traits::Into<CM31, QM31> {
    fn into(self: CM31) -> QM31 {
        QM31 { a: self, b: core::num::traits::zero::Zero::zero() }

Suggestion:

b: Zero::zero() 

[spapinistarkware]

Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @shaharsamocha7)

---

stwo_cairo_verifier/src/fields/qm31.cairo line 16 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, shaharsamocha7 wrote…

should fail on zero. Is it ok to ignore that?

Done.

[shaharsamocha7]

Reviewed 4 of 4 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 1 unresolved discussion (waiting on @spapinistarkware)

---

stwo_cairo_verifier/src/fields/cm31.cairo line 12 at r2 (raw file):

pub impl CM31Impl of CM31Trait {
    fn inverse(self: CM31) -> CM31 {
        assert_ne!(self, core::num::traits::Zero::zero());

Consider

Suggestion:

       assert_ne!(self, Zero::zero());