Re: [boost] [review] hash functions

From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-16 12:07:14

In-Reply-To: <989aceac05031508512fb3bd43_at_[hidden]>
(reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfe
r-encoding:references; 
b=R/dgT5RcmFTM4l6wo1FsmJV0WmZRxxS4UwfDvrZfxiBXu3i07NjqdqXmY0k93EfeA2rzuv0U
dyun6iZo4Mn86mrySznULAY97Xn/zgqN3tU49cmIB/EtvwNWQzyHhnrH/iKu8pfDQoo6swyqX4
AJ8ih0MJXLu4umRrhBw7YSD2E=) wrote (abridged):
> > However, it yields hash values for int * different to the values for 
> > char *, so with the current design aims we can't use it.
> 
> It also has the undesirable side-effect of making the hash value
> depend on the machine endianness.  The same set of integers would hash
> to different values on (say) Sparc and Intel machines.

True - another variant of the stability issue.

-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK