Adding the get output function#29
Merged
Merged
Conversation
OBrezhniev
approved these changes
Mar 20, 2025
…js version bump in tests
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Add a utility function
getOutputthat takes awitnessand a map where the keys represent the desired output names and the values indicate the number of elements to retrieve. It returns the corresponding circuit outputs from the witness.For example:
gives back:
{ a_inv: [ 18015910124504391758n, 10263769591271306743n, 17554040121178085313n, 8619307900730399718n, 11898114031726211586n ], b_inv: [ 0n, 0n, 0n, 0n, 0n ] }It is perfectly fine to specify fewer outputs than the total available, as well as to request fewer elements than the full output size. For example:
would produce the following output:
{ a_inv: [ 18015910124504391758n, 10263769591271306743n, 17554040121178085313n ] }