Re: Formal review request for Hash2

From: Claudio DeSouza (cdesouza_at_[hidden])
Date: 2024-12-03 21:30:16

I'll be on holiday next week, and absent for a long period, potentially
until next year, so I'm wondering if I should already submit my review, as
I have had some back channel conversations about it with the authors.

Claudio.

On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 9:11 PM Ivan Matek via Boost <boost_at_[hidden]>
wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 10:07 PM Vinnie Falco <vinnie.falco_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 12:09 PM Peter Dimov via Boost <
> > boost_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >
> >> pair<string, string>( "foo", "bar" )
> >> pair<string, string>( "foob", "ar" )
> >> pair<string, string>( "fooba", "r" )
> >>
> >
> > But....but... in each of these cases where there are two strings, the
> > strings also submit their size after the data, thus these would not be
> > equivalent:
> >
> >     { "foo", 3, "bar", 3 }
> >     { "foob", 4, "ar", 2 }
> >     { "fooba", 5, "r", 1 }
> >
> > Or am I missing something?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
> Yes, currently it works fine(as you described). Peter was using that as an
> example why we add size of range when hashing. To avoid collisions like
> this.  I was basically asking why hash_append of span<char> also hashes
> span size since I expected it just consume the bytes span points to.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>