Thanks for the useful feedback.
Nick I thought about creating an object for the number but I was
apprehensive about the allocation overhead. It seems strange that NSRect and
NSPoint are structs and not objects, but I'm rolling with it :)
Mike thanks for suggesting I use integer value as its own hash. I was
looking in completely the wrong places.
Steve
On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 2:21 PM, Michael Ash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 16, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Steve Wart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What's the standard way of hashing non-object values in Cocoa?
>
> For primitives, the hash value can generally just be itself.
>
> Recall that NSUinteger is just a typedef for either int (in 32-bit) or
> long (in 64-bit). So it's just an integer.
>
> You have a pair of floats. The simplest thing to do would be to cast
> them to NSUInteger, thereby truncating off the decimal bits, and then
> XOR the result together:
>
> - (NSUInteger)hash { return (NSUInteger)p.x ^ (NSUInteger)p.y; }
>
> Note that this stops making much sense if you expect your points to be
> fractional values, and you want different fractional values to be
> considered unequal*. In that case, I'd recommend simply using the
> whole float bit-pattern as your hash:
>
> static NSUInteger CGFloatHash(CGFloat f) { return *(NSUInteger *)&f; }
>
> - (NSUInteger)hash { return CGFloatHash(p.x) ^ CGFloatHash(p.y); }
>
> (This works in both 32-bit and 64-bit since NSUInteger and CGFloat
> happen to be the same size. If you use this in real code then I
> recommend at least adding a check that the sizes are in fact equal and
> failing in some loud, obvious way if they aren't so you don't end up
> reading junk.)
>
> Note that if you ever expect to have both positive zero and negative
> zero in your points then this will fall apart, as negative zero and
> positive zero can compare as equal but don't have matching bit
> patterns. The solution to this is left as an exercise to the reader,
> with a pointer to the IEEE 754 spec.
>
> * Note that in general it's bad to compare floating point numbers with
> non-integral parts for equality anyway. Two numbers which you think
> should be equal may well not be due to rounding error in the
> calculations which generated them. There's even an optional gcc
> warning flag, -Wfloat-equal, which will produce a warning any time the
> == operator is used on floating point numbers. Thus if your instance
> variables are NSPoints, and you expect those points to have fractional
> values, and you're using those variables as part of your equality
> comparison, you're probably doing something wrong. (Although if you
> only expect two floats to be equal when you've merely saved a copy of
> one to look up later, then that can be reasonably expected to work.)
>
> Mike
>
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
