From: Daniel James (daniel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-02-05 12:53:08
JOAQUIN LOPEZ MU?Z wrote:
> Do you think we can put your hash<> implementation under
> boost/functional/hash.hpp and have some short docs for it?
> Are you planning to improve the hashing algorithms (in particular
> for strings, which I guess it's the most improvable part)?
To be honest, I've barely looked at the hash functions so far. All I've
done is change them to work on compilers without partial specialization.
I'm planning to make improvements, but I'll have to do some research
into the possible alogorithms first. If anyone has an opinions on this,
I'll be very interested.
> If I could have this in time for Boost 1.33 I'd be extremely
> grateful, since Boost.MultiIndex hashed indices (practically
> finished now) need a hash<>, and I don't think it is convenient
> that each library ships with its own version.
Certainly. I'll get something done this week.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk