We have a programming question for a language (Circom 2) that's tailor-made for a cryptographic task: construction of zk-SNARKs.
Should we accept such questions? Shall we create a tag, and which? Any better name than circom
for that?
We have a programming question for a language (Circom 2) that's tailor-made for a cryptographic task: construction of zk-SNARKs.
Should we accept such questions? Shall we create a tag, and which? Any better name than circom
for that?
I believe that we should adjust our programming close reason so it makes an exception for languages designed specifically and exclusively for cryptographers working on cryptographic problems (thus it should exclude languages that are merely used by cryptographers, like Sage). We can then create a programming tag, and have the tag description highlight that it is only to be used for questions about such on-topic languages. There is no need to have a different tag for each language.
Remember, our goal is not to gate keep arbitrary rules, but to ensure that the site stays on-topic and is not bogged down by pointless questions asking how to compile OpenSSL or why their browser is giving them a security warning. Unless there's a risk that allowing (some) programming questions in limited scope will devolve the site into Stack Overflow: Cryptography Edition, I think they are fine.
Some relaxation of the off-topic rule is deserved I believe.
SO is a high-volume site. If we migrate all programming questions to there, question may get drown in the noise; in contrast, Crypto.SE attracts at least some programmers with experties in cryptography. Also, SO lack some tags that help find questions in relevant sub-field in cryptography, so allow them here may help users find them quicker.
I suggest that, if we cannot yet formulate objective rules for evaluating whether to migrate a programming question, we do it on a case-by-case basis.