Feat/fliparoos

[vojtechsu]

Add generation of formulas using fliparoos, switch_signs, partitions.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 118 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (67723ff) 83.42% compared to head (d1c36cd) 84.42%.

Files	Patch %	Lines
pyecsca/ec/formula/partitions.py	79.28%	48 Missing and 9 partials ⚠️
pyecsca/ec/formula/graph.py	86.26%	38 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pyecsca/ec/formula/fliparoo.py	96.80%	5 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
pyecsca/ec/formula/metrics.py	90.77%	3 Missing and 3 partials ⚠️
pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py	94.26%	3 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
pyecsca/ec/formula/efd.py	97.34%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #56      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   83.42%   84.42%   +1.01%     
==========================================
  Files          75       82       +7     
  Lines        6017     6975     +958     
  Branches     1117     1307     +190     
==========================================
+ Hits         5019     5888     +869     
- Misses        767      838      +71     
- Partials      231      249      +18     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[J08nY]

Some notes for me to work on this:

• Make pyecsca.ec.formula a package and include this stuff in there.
• Unify formula metrics in the formula package (from structural re).
• Move stuff into tests, have the library formulas as a test fixture (reused).
• Figure out how to instantiate formula objects properly (out of the code data, not files).
• Add function that does all of the transformations on a given formula (or a set of formulas), make it the public API.

[J08nY]

@vojtechsu Could you please have a look at the following typing warnings? I cannot properly evaluate whether they are identifying bugs or just mis-annotation:

• pyecsca/ec/formula/fliparoo.py:120: error: Argument 1 to "is_subfliparoo" has incompatible type "Fliparoo"; expected "tuple[Node]" [arg-type]
• pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py:39: error: Argument 3 to "switch_sign_propagate" has incompatible type "dict[str, int]"; expected "dict[Node, str]" [arg-type]
  Connected to that also:
  • pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py:73: error: Invalid index type "str" for "dict[Node, str]"; expected type "Node" [index]
  • pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py:82: error: Invalid index type "str" for "dict[Node, str]"; expected type "Node" [index]
  • pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py:93: error: Invalid index type "str" for "dict[Node, str]"; expected type "Node" [index]

[vojtechsu]

@vojtechsu Could you please have a look at the following typing warnings? I cannot properly evaluate whether they are identifying bugs or just mis-annotation:

* `pyecsca/ec/formula/fliparoo.py:120: error: Argument 1 to "is_subfliparoo" has incompatible type "Fliparoo"; expected "tuple[Node]"  [arg-type]`

* `pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py:39: error: Argument 3 to "switch_sign_propagate" has incompatible type "dict[str, int]"; expected "dict[Node, str]"  [arg-type]`
  Connected to that also:
  
  * `pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py:73: error: Invalid index type "str" for "dict[Node, str]"; expected type "Node"  [index]`
  * `pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py:82: error: Invalid index type "str" for "dict[Node, str]"; expected type "Node"  [index]`
  * `pyecsca/ec/formula/switch_sign.py:93: error: Invalid index type "str" for "dict[Node, str]"; expected type "Node"  [index]`

They are just mis-annotations. I will fix this.