On Wednesday, 8 August 2012 at 17:33:01 UTC,
trav...@phare.normalesup.org (Christophe Travert) wrote:
I think you misunderstood me (and it's probably my fault, since
I don't
know much of hash functions), I was wanted to compare two kind
of
concepts:
1/ message digest functions, like md5, or sha1, used on large
files,
which is what is covered by this std.hash proposal.
2/ small hash function. Like what are use in an associative
array, and
are called toHash when used a member function.
And I didn't thought of:
3/ cryptographic hash functions
Actually, maybe I'm the one not doing a good job of explaining.
1 and 3 are the same things (what you're calling "message digest"
functions are cryptographic hash functions). I'm saying that even
though similar in name, cryptographic hash functions really can't
(IMO, I suppose I should make clear) be put in the same place as
normal hash functions because they barely have anything in
common. You can't use on in the place of another nor are they
really used in similar manners.
My opinion was that in a module or package called hash, I
expect tools
concerning #2.
I agree. I'd think similarly (I'd assume std.hash has something
to do with hash tables or hash functions used for hash tables).
If I were looking to use a cryptographic hash function like SHA1
or (eh) MD5, I'd look for std.crypto first, and probably pick
std.digest if I saw that. As a last resort I'd look in std.hash
and vomit profusely after seeing it grouped with the "times 33"
hash.
