On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Daniel James <dnljms@gmail.com> wrote:
On 26 January 2012 11:16, Andrey Semashev <andrey.semashev@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 12:16 PM, Daniel James <dnljms@gmail.com> wrote:
Actually functional/hash doesn't. It's good enough for the standard, but no better. For numbers that fit into the hash value, it just returns them unchanged which is fine for a prime number of buckets but not for power of 2 containers.
Well, we probably better fix functional/hash then?
No, it's deliberate. It meets the standard's requirements. No more, no less.
I don't see why it shouldn't do better than required by the standard. It's quite normal for Boost components to extend the standard and provide superior solutions. Anyway, if existing functional/hash functions are not suitable for the task, we can add the bit mixing wrapper and recommend its usage with Boost.Unordered.