Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

added sudoku example for prover and verifier #1282

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 3, 2024

Conversation

2pir2
Copy link
Contributor

@2pir2 2pir2 commented Sep 22, 2024

Description

I was working on a project that is using zk-snark to proof some properties of a machine learning model, and I realized all the existing code does not simulate a real-world scenario. Therefore, I created this example to simulate the interactions between prover anda verifier.

Type of change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

How has this been tested?

  • Instructions are in the readme.txt

How has this been benchmarked?

  • Benchmark A, on Macbook air M1, 8GB RAM

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I did not modify files generated from templates
  • golangci-lint does not output errors locally
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

@ivokub ivokub self-requested a review October 2, 2024 22:53
@ivokub ivokub added doc good first issue Good for newcomers labels Oct 2, 2024
@ivokub
Copy link
Collaborator

ivokub commented Oct 2, 2024

Thanks for posting the PR. I refactored it a bit to follow the other examples and to avoid independent packages inside main repo.

Have a look at it, but I would be good to merge it currently as is.

Copy link
Collaborator

@ivokub ivokub left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good! I refactored a bit but the general implementation is the same.

@ivokub ivokub merged commit 382258a into Consensys:master Oct 3, 2024
3 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants