This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

classification
Title: account for dict randomization in Design & History FAQ
Type: Stage: resolved
Components: Documentation Versions: Python 3.4
process
Status: closed Resolution: fixed
Dependencies: Superseder:
Assigned To: docs@python Nosy List: cvrebert, docs@python, python-dev
Priority: normal Keywords:

Created on 2012-03-14 02:51 by cvrebert, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin. This issue is now closed.

Messages (2)
msg155714 - (view) Author: Chris Rebert (cvrebert) * Date: 2012-03-14 02:51
The randomization introduced by the fix for issue 13703 means that the example string hash values given in http://docs.python.org/dev/faq/design.html#how-are-dictionaries-implemented are liable to become more difficult to reproduce (in fact, the example already currently implicitly assumes a 32-bit build). Either the phrasing should be changed to emphasize that these are *possible* values the strings *might* hash to, or no concrete hash values should be given at all.
msg155726 - (view) Author: Roundup Robot (python-dev) (Python triager) Date: 2012-03-14 06:50
New changeset 305cf9be1cd3 by Georg Brandl in branch 'default':
Closes #14298: update section about dict implementation.
http://hg.python.org/cpython/rev/305cf9be1cd3
History
Date User Action Args
2022-04-11 14:57:27adminsetgithub: 58506
2012-03-14 06:50:22python-devsetstatus: open -> closed

nosy: + python-dev
messages: + msg155726

resolution: fixed
stage: resolved
2012-03-14 02:51:16cvrebertcreate