From: Dave Harris (brangdon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-16 12:07:14
pdimov_at_[hidden] (Peter Dimov) wrote (abridged):
> If you _know_ how the default hash function will perform on your key
> set, you can make the decision of whether to use it or not, and if the
> hash function is standard, you do not have to re-evaluate your decision
> each time you change platforms.
I do appreciate the benefits of stability. What isn't clear is whether it
trumps hash quality. This is a judgement call, in that it partly depends
on which issue is more important to you.
Ultimately if you want stability you can get it by using your own hasher.
If you want the best quality the platform can deliver, then that's
intrinsically non-portable; it should be provided by the vendor but in a
We could both be made happy if boost provided 2 hashers as standard, one
for stability and one for quality. However, I don't think we want to go
that route at this stage, and anyway there can only be one default.
This is /not/ a deal-breaker for me. I won't reject the proposal because
it favours stability over hash quality.
-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk