Use libsodium and scrypt for hash_names

[dirkschumacher]

This uses libsodium's scrypt implementation. It also returns the data frame with stringsAsFactors=FALSE. Plus I changed the doc slightly to emphasize that a secret, random salt should be used. Oh and the salt needs to be length=1 (i.e. one salt for all inputs).

However the interface stays the same and I tried to leave the changes to a minimum.

Addresses #4 and #6

Downside/Upside: scrypt is about 40 times slower than sha1

# with plain sha1
microbenchmark::microbenchmark(epitrix::hash_names("watwat"))
#> Unit: microseconds
#>                           expr     min      lq    mean   median       uq
#>  epitrix::hash_names("watwat") 726.322 821.655 1242.65 995.4295 1098.189
#>       max neval
#>  23509.71   100

# with scrypt
microbenchmark::microbenchmark(epitrix::hash_names("watwat"))
#> Unit: milliseconds
#>                           expr      min       lq     mean   median
#>  epitrix::hash_names("watwat") 37.51021 38.46791 39.91234 39.19013
#>        uq      max neval
#>  40.33603 67.45346   100

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #7 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##           master     #7   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     100%   100%           
=====================================
  Files           5      5           
  Lines          93    101    +8     
=====================================
+ Hits           93    101    +8

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
R/hash_names.R	100% <100%> (ø)	⬆️

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d9c369b...0082c0a. Read the comment docs.

[thibautjombart]

Sounds great, back from holiday today, will check asap.

…

On Fri, 28 Sep 2018, 18:41 codecov[bot], ***@***.***> wrote: Codecov <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/pull/7?src=pr&el=h1> Report Merging #7 <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/pull/7?src=pr&el=desc> into master <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/commit/d9c369b007dd772173eb16d8cfd1d7e1c115477d?src=pr&el=desc> will *not change* coverage. The diff coverage is 100%. [image: Impacted file tree graph] <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/pull/7?src=pr&el=tree> @@ Coverage Diff @@## master #7 +/- ## ===================================== Coverage 100% 100% ===================================== Files 5 5 Lines 93 99 +6 =====================================+ Hits 93 99 +6 Impacted Files <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/pull/7?src=pr&el=tree> Coverage Δ R/hash_names.R <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/pull/7/diff?src=pr&el=tree#diff-Ui9oYXNoX25hbWVzLlI=> 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️ ------------------------------ Continue to review full report at Codecov <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/pull/7?src=pr&el=continue>. *Legend* - Click here to learn more <https://docs.codecov.io/docs/codecov-delta> Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/pull/7?src=pr&el=footer>. Last update d9c369b...70f296c <https://codecov.io/gh/reconhub/epitrix/pull/7?src=pr&el=lastupdated>. Read the comment docs <https://docs.codecov.io/docs/pull-request-comments> . — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#7 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKQkIr22n3GDns6pmQLwGHPuGDm7mGQxks5uflElgaJpZM4W-yAN> .

[thibautjombart]

@dirkschumacher can you also add yourself to the authors in the DESCRIPTION file?