Implement simple lottery.

[tolikzinovyev]

Content

Implement simple lottery's prove and verify functions. This PR doesn't have tests. Let's see what property tests will test and if it still makes sense to add other tests.

Pre-submit checklist

• Branch
  • Tests are provided (if possible)
  • Commit sequence broadly makes sense
  • Key commits have useful messages
• PR
  • No clippy warnings in the CI
  • Self-reviewed the diff
  • Useful pull request description
  • Reviewer requested
• Documentation
  • Update README file (if relevant)
  • Update documentation website (if relevant)

Issue(s)

Closes #69

[rrtoledo]

LGTM!

I would just add (a couple of) function(s) for the node to send a proof and the aggregator to check an individual element either exposing in algo or creating in the wrapper.
Doing so, we would support decentralized settings,

• the node can check locally if it has to send an element
• the aggregator could verify a single element as soon as they arrive, push them on a local and vector and cast it as a Proof when succesfully verifying the last one needed

We either can have 2 functions, separating the node from the aggregator, or one use by both.

[tolikzinovyev]

I only planned to create an interface for the centralized setting. Let's work on the decentralized interface separately? I would be a different wrapper according to design doc. @rrtoledo

[rrtoledo]

I only planned to create an interface for the centralized setting. Let's work on the decentralized interface separately? I would be a different wrapper according to design doc. @rrtoledo

Sure let's do it in a separate PR.
As for the wrapper, we should reuse the existing code so we can see whether we should have 2 wrappers for centralised and decentralised settings in wrapper.rs or not.

[curiecrypt]

• Are you planning to add/enhance public function docs in another PR?
• I would write a simple test function even though the protests will cover most of the cases.
• Also, I saw a typo in file simple_lottery/init.rs line 27: bound_completess. FYI :)
  LGTM 👍

[tolikzinovyev]

@curiecrypt

Are you planning to add/enhance public function docs in another PR?

There is an open issue to do this for all files. #65 Not sure if I will have time this week though.

I would write a simple test function even though the protests will cover most of the cases.

I'm afraid that if I write a test, it would become obsolete when property tests are implemented. However, if they do not test something, I would be happy to revisit this!

Also, I saw a typo in file simple_lottery/init.rs line 27: bound_completess. FYI :)

Thanks, will make a PR with a fix.

[curiecrypt]

LGTM 👍

[tolikzinovyev]

@rrtoledo waiting for your LGTM as promised :)

[rrtoledo]

LGTM with changes agreed to do in #65