Daniel-Aaron-Bloom
Daniel-Aaron-Bloom
Is there any interest in this change?
It is only a `.0` to get the entry, but fair enough. I may just be overly biased against `unwrap`. Any consideration to having it as a separate API? Or...
You're welcome! Anything else you need from me before a merge? Otherwise feel free to merge at your convenience.
@GlenDC Yes, it is mildly breaking, so probably has to wait for a minor version. Also I have lost access to the account which made this PR, so you can...
Fair. I would note though that `specialization` is probably the least likely feature to be stabilized in the near future, so depending on your plans to remove that from `plonky2_field`,...
What a shame. Someone should probably close #1034 then, as this is just an updated version of that.
I'm not sure what "extra change" you're referring to. The original change parallelizes a single loop in `reduce_polys_base` and modifies the call site of that function to support the required...
Ah, so then we are talking about the extra collect, as the mapped Vec has to be able to be parallelizable to be passed into the `reduce`. Sure, I can...
Oh, but to answer your question directly, the reason was to incorporate [this feedback](https://github.com/0xPolygonZero/plonky2/pull/1034#discussion_r1190433826).