On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 09:15:50 GMT, Andrew Dinn <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Perhaps the `Curve25519OrderField` and `Curve448OrderField` can be >> refactored away from `IntegerPolynomialModBinP`, but I would not suggest >> that for this PR. >> >> I'm ok with changing the constructor to be private, but it's not accessible >> from the public API, so it's not a necessary change. > > Ok, so if the only clients can be in this package then I guess that it is > very unlikely anyone is ever going pass in an `IntegerPolynomialModBinP` > instance with zero limbs. > @ferakocz could you add a comment above the declaration of ctr stating that > the loop assumes the limb count in ctr is positive. Added the comment. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30941#discussion_r3435336901
