Message 326198 - Python tracker

➜

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.

Author	tim.peters
Recipients	eric.smith, jdemeyer, mark.dickinson, rhettinger, sir-sigurd, tim.peters
Date	2018-09-24.00:41:18
SpamBayes Score	-1.0
Marked as misclassified	Yes
Message-id	<1537749679.41.0.956365154283.issue34751@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to

Content
[Raymond, on boosting the multiplier on 64-bit boxes] > Yes, that would be perfectly reasonable (though to some > extent the objects in the tuple also share some of the > responsibility for getting all bits into play). It's of value independent of that. Tuples of ints used as keys and set elements are very important, and I doubt we'll ever give up on that `hash(i) == i` for the typically "not huge" ints used in such contexts. Jeroen gave a reasonable example of how boosting the multiplier can help in a case of that above: https://bugs.python.org/msg326032

[Raymond, on boosting the multiplier on 64-bit boxes]
> Yes, that would be perfectly reasonable (though to some
> extent the objects in the tuple also share some of the
> responsibility for getting all bits into play).

It's of value independent of that.  Tuples of ints used as keys and set elements are very important, and I doubt we'll ever give up on that `hash(i) == i` for the typically "not huge" ints used in such contexts.  Jeroen gave a reasonable example of how boosting the multiplier can help in a case of that above:

https://bugs.python.org/msg326032

History
Date	User	Action	Args
2018-09-24 00:41:19	tim.peters	set	recipients: + tim.peters, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, eric.smith, jdemeyer, sir-sigurd
2018-09-24 00:41:19	tim.peters	set	messageid: <1537749679.41.0.956365154283.issue34751@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2018-09-24 00:41:19	tim.peters	link	issue34751 messages
2018-09-24 00:41:18	tim.peters	create