Shared toom evaluation functions

[Torbjorn Granlund]

bodrato at mail.dm.unipi.it writes:

  > Well...  I cleaned up rsblsh2_n's return value now, -1...3 should be its
  > range, I think.
  
  I tested also rsblsh_n( , , , ,2) in place of rsblsh2_n, but it fails the
  tests... maybe also its return value needs a clean-up?
  
You're welcome to clean this up.

If the right conventions are not evident, gmp-devel will probably be
happy to express some opinions...

-- 
Torbjörn