31 Jan
2012
31 Jan
'12
8:31 p.m.
On 31 Jan 2012, at 19:58, Daniel James wrote:
On 31 January 2012 16:19, Kai Schroeder <kaischroeder3@googlemail.com> wrote:
Well, I tend to agree that this is a bug in TBB
I actually don't. If TBB requires a better quality hash function, then that's fine. I also wouldn't use boost::hash or std::hash with google's hash tables.
It would be easy to provide a boost::hash_shuffle, that could be applied to any boost::hash and provide this stronger requirement (that there is no corrolation between (a-b) and (hash(a)-hash(b)). This would avoid the need to re-write all the existing hash functions. Chris