Testing implementations of sha256.  Defines faster than inlines?
No more memory copies, yet I feel its slower.
65536 iterations took 0.559947 seconds.
eb c3 b6 66 ea 72 89 fa 86 c6 21 06 35 96 34 d2 18 6d a6 9d 98 3d e8 68 d3 51 d0 a0 02 f6 c8 8d
65536 iterations took 0.610789 seconds.
0a f2 f4 1c 60 58 27 da 4a 0f 7f 19 18 7e 83 f8 fc c5 9c 5d 88 97 71 7f 00 8e db 4c 8c bc 13 9d
Revert "No more memory copies, yet I feel its slower."

This reverts commit 5b3f23e08e8db9b5abeb71424f57e413423ed1be.

Tests indicate that this commit is indeed slower.

65536 iterations took 0.529235 seconds.
eb c3 b6 66 ea 72 89 fa 86 c6 21 06 35 96 34 d2 18 6d a6 9d 98 3d e8 68 d3 51 d0 a0 02 f6 c8 8d
65536 iterations took 0.599258 seconds.
0a f2 f4 1c 60 58 27 da 4a 0f 7f 19 18 7e 83 f8 fc c5 9c 5d 88 97 71 7f 00 8e db 4c 8c bc 13 9d
Faster, but incorrect.
This commit shows there is a bug in the sha256 implementation due to lack of accounting for size bits in padding
sha256_fast is now main testing ground
Merge branch 'sha256_opt' into shabug

Conflicts:
	sha256_fast.c

Fixed conflicts, now to fix padding
Bug fixed, works as expected now.  Test vectors to be added soon.