Christian Heimes added the comment: Am 28.10.2013 18:15, schrieb Serhiy Storchaka: > _PyHash_Fini() should be moved out too._Py_HashBytes() is only function which > should be customized.
You still haven' convinced me to scatter hash-related functions over multiple C files. And it won't work with a static definition of the hash function and PyHash_FuncDef. They MUST be in one object file. > Because it is redundant and only complicates the code, both use and > declaration. No, I disagree with you. It makes the code less complicated because it encapsulates all related data in one place. Please provide a patch that shows the contrary. > There are other hash related functions (hashing integers, tuples). Only > _Py_HashBytes() should be customized and only it worth moving to separated > file. Python doesn't have a hash function for integers anymore. It has a specialized function for PyLongObject. pyhash.c contains common helper functions. > The benefit is that the code will be simpler if get rid from > HAVE_ALIGNED_REQUIRED and related code in ./configure. Only on such archaic > architectures hash code will be slower. And it will clutter other code... Please provide a patch and benchmarks for your proposal. I'll incorporate your patch if it have zero impact on speed and doesn't make the code harder to understand. > Let first land simplified patch and then you could add features such as > PY_HASH_EXTERNAL and PyHash_FuncDef. No, I'm not going to remove code in order to re-add it later. If you don't like my PEP then please provide patches. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue19183> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
