[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: expose XHASH [patch]

From: Paul Pogonyshev
Subject: Re: expose XHASH [patch]
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2016 13:52:50 +0200

Second patch iteration, taking into account all comments by Paul Eggert.


* src/fns.c (Fsxhash_eq, Fsxhash_eql): New functions.

* doc/lispref/hash.texi (Defining Hash): Document 'sxhash-eq' and 'sxhash-eql'.

* etc/NEWS: Mention 'sxhash-eq' and 'sxhash-eql'.

On 1 April 2016 at 11:44, Paul Pogonyshev <address@hidden> wrote:
> Paul Eggert wrote:
>> The documentation for the new function should be next to the documentation 
>> for sxhash.
> I just skipped all the examples related to 'sxhash'. But I don't mind.
>> Shouldn't we expose hashfn_eq, not XHASH? After all, (make-hash-table :test 
>> 'eq ...) uses hashfn_eq, not XHASH.
> Probably you are right. I don't know the internal details well enough
> to comment on this.
>> Should we also expose hashfn_eql, which is what make-hash-table uses by 
>> default? Or is that a waste of time since hashfn_eql is the default?
> I'd say expose it too, at least for the cases of composite hashing as
> in my example.
>> Not sure I like the name xhash. Maybe sxhash-eq instead? That would let us 
>> use the name sxhash-eql for hashfn_eql.
> I tried to keep familiar names (at least for those who work on C
> code), but if we change that to 'hashfn_eq' and additionally expose
> something for 'eql', I guess your idea is better.
> I'll wait if more comments on these points appear before creating next
> patch iteration.
> Paul

Attachment: sxhash-eq[l].diff
Description: Text document

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]