|
|
|
|
|
by andrewcooke
6010 days ago
|
|
ah, ok, thanks. for "simple" values they wouldn't need to actually store the hash. instead they could use, for example, the actual value of an int, byte, float etc, xored with a type-specific base (but it wouldn't be that great as a hash in, say, a hash table - better to use some function that preserves uniqueness but disperses related values). that would mean they only need to store large hashes for composite structures. edit: i am making life too complicated. in short, if it can be calculated quickly, it doesn't have to be stored. |
|