Tim Peters <t...@python.org> added the comment:
> So it seems that this SMHasher test suite doesn't > catch the problem that we're seeing with negative integers. Seems to be so, but I've never run SMHasher myself. I believe it's focused on statistical properties, like avalanche and bit independence. > However, we ideally want a hash that works well for > all kinds of inputs. If the hash function is good, > it shouldn't be possible to write a hash collision > test function which has a significantly higher chance > of failing than random chance. I know of no such hash functions short of crypto-strength ones. Nobody uses those for hash tables, though, because they're much slower and usually much more involved. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue34751> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
