Re: Hash computation and TFB

[Richard Frith-Macdonald]

On 6 Aug 2013, at 14:39, Richard Frith-Macdonald <address@hidden> wrote:

> 
> On 6 Aug 2013, at 14:30, Stefan Bidi <address@hidden> wrote:
> 
>> I copied the hash algorithm straight out of -base, so they should match.  I 
>> remember a few months ago Richard was playing around with hash functions and 
>> this might be causing some issues, now.
> 
> It wouldn't on a normal setup ... the experimental hash code is used only if 
> you explicitly build it.

Incidentally, the new hash looks to give a really good distribution, but is 
significantly slower.  That would make it poor for listeral strings.

But ... I recall David mentioning the possibility of changing the layout of 
literal objects produced by the compiler.

Perhaps it would not be unreasonable to add a flag to clang to get it to use 
MurmurHash3 (which is public domain) to generate the literal string hash at 
compile time ... so that we could use it directly from gnustep-base (and 
corebase).  That would give us a great hash distribution and zero computation 
time for literal strings.