On 6 Aug 2013, at 14:39, Richard Frith-Macdonald <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 6 Aug 2013, at 14:30, Stefan Bidi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I copied the hash algorithm straight out of -base, so they should match. I >> remember a few months ago Richard was playing around with hash functions and >> this might be causing some issues, now. > > It wouldn't on a normal setup ... the experimental hash code is used only if > you explicitly build it. Incidentally, the new hash looks to give a really good distribution, but is significantly slower. That would make it poor for listeral strings. But ... I recall David mentioning the possibility of changing the layout of literal objects produced by the compiler. Perhaps it would not be unreasonable to add a flag to clang to get it to use MurmurHash3 (which is public domain) to generate the literal string hash at compile time ... so that we could use it directly from gnustep-base (and corebase). That would give us a great hash distribution and zero computation time for literal strings. _______________________________________________ Gnustep-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
