Currently, `aggregate_signature` takes a `&[&BlsSignature]`, where a `&[BlsSignature]` would work just as well. Could this (and `aggregate_verify`) have improved APIs for use here?
Currently,
aggregate_signaturetakes a&[&BlsSignature], where a&[BlsSignature]would work just as well.Could this (and
aggregate_verify) have improved APIs for use here?