crc | fast implementation of the ECMA-182 CRC64 checksum | Cryptography library

The thing is, the value does not change.

It's not supposed to. The filesystem::hash_value is a hash of the path to the file, not the contents of the file. If you want to compute a CRC of the contents of a file, you're going to have to read those contents and apply a CRC algorithm to them.

I checked the packages via wireshark and found the unkown pricipalname error. Thanks for the hint @Samson Scharfrichter

The correct spn registration is setspn.exe -A HTTP/ourserver01.example.com exampleUser without the project itself.

The error you are getting is because you declare the variable "moneyRates" but you do not instantiate it to something.

Instead of adding the CRC to the image data, you may append the CRC to the end of the PNG file (as binary file).
Applications that read the new file (with few for bytes at the end) are going to ignore the redundant bytes.

• Copy the content of download.png to bitadd_crc.png
• Write the CRC (as two HEX digits or other format), to the end of bitadd_crc.png file.

The only difference of bitadd_crc.png and download.png is going to be the last two bytes.

Here is a code sample:

The reason behind my getting this error is due to hibernate not checking correctly for null in the version column, in my case the updated_at with type datetime.

Looking at the hibernate trace logs rather than checking with the operator is null it uses the = operator to check for null value, which would return the undesired value that causes the exception to be thrown.

Workaround or maybe rather it's a constraint that must be defined to begin with is to add a not null or a default value.

The delegate signature needs to match; the good news is: there are lots of ways to do that via lambdas; for example:

I was wondering how 64-bit CRC on an FPGA compares to two 32-bit CRCs (different polynomials) on the same FPGA.

On a "normal" FPGA it does not matter which kind of information (CRCs, checksums, floating-point values ...) you compare:

Checking if a 64-bit value equals another 64-bit value takes the same amount of resources (gates or time).

This is of course not true if you use an FPGA that has a built-in CRC unit that (as an example) supports CRC32 but not CRC64 ...

Would two 32 bits CRC be more complicated than performing a single 64-bit CRC?

In both cases you'll need 64 logic cells (this means: 64 LUTs and 64 flip-flops).

In the case of a 64-bit CRC, 63 logic cells must be connected to the previous logic cell and there must be one signal line connecting the first and the last logic cell.

In the case of two 32-bit CRCs, 62 logic cells must be connected to the previous logic cell and there must be two signal lines connecting the first and the last logic cell of each CRC.

If you have an FPGA that allows connecting 64 cells in a row without using a "long" signal line, the 64-bit CRC saves one "long" signal line.

(Edit: On the FPGA on my eval board you can connect 16 cells in a row; on such an FPGA, both onw 64-bit CRC and two 32-bit CRC would cost 5 "long" signal lines.)

Is it going to take a while or it would be fast?

How can I calculate the complexity (or do a complexity analysis)?

You require one clock cycle per bit - in both cases.

Note that an FPGA works completely differently than a computer:

You typically don't need time to perform some operation but all operations are performed at the same time...

From the verifier's logs, you have some invalid access here:

Just initialize crc result to 0xFFFF not zero as I expect. such: