From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-10 12:01:55
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> so basically you're saying that any collision is much worse than a
> slower hash function because we must use == to go through the bucket ?
Something like that, yes; of course it depends on the level of slowness.
Cryptographic hash functions are typically overkill. Increasing the number
of collisions slightly is tolerable (but can easily negate the effect of the
faster hash function). Hitting a pathological case where a significant
percentage of the key set maps to the same bucket is a serious problem.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk