Add myself to CODEOWNERS

Author: waamm

CODEOWNERS

@@ -45,8 +45,8 @@
 /crates/aptos @gregnazario @banool
 
 # Owners for the `/crates/aptos-crypto*` directories.
-/crates/aptos-crypto-derive/ @alinush @zjma @rex1fernando
-/crates/aptos-crypto/ @alinush @zjma @rex1fernando
+/crates/aptos-crypto-derive/ @alinush @zjma @rex1fernando @waamm
+/crates/aptos-crypto/ @alinush @zjma @rex1fernando @waamm
 
 # Owners for the `/crates/aptos-faucet` directory and all its subdirectories. And other faucet, genesis, and OpenAPI-related crates.
 /crates/aptos-faucet @banool @gregnazario
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@
 /terraform/ @aptos-labs/prod-eng
 
 # Owners for the `aptos-dkg` crate.
-/crates/aptos-dkg @alinush @rex1fernando
+/crates/aptos-dkg @alinush @rex1fernando @waamm
 
 /types/src/keyless/ @alinush
 /types/src/transaction/authenticator.rs @alinush

crates/aptos-crypto/src/arkworks/shamir.rs

@@ -27,7 +27,6 @@ pub type ShamirShare<F: WeightedSum> = (Player, F);
 pub type ShamirGroupShare<G: CurveGroup> = ShamirShare<G>;
 
 /// All dealt secret keys should be reconstructable from a subset of \[dealt secret key\] shares.
-/// TODO: Should we keep Vec<(Player, Self::Share)> ? Vec<ShamirShare> looks simpler / more descriptive
 pub trait Reconstructable<SSC: traits::SecretSharingConfig>: Sized {
     /// The "share" type. Minor nit: this is a slight misnomer; you can't actually reconstruct
     /// using just a vec of shares, you need a vec of pairs (Player, Self::Share). So the pair