"Daniel James" <daniel@calamity.org.uk> wrote in message news:d0mtqf$98h$1@sea.gmane.org... | Peter Dimov wrote: | | > It is a deliberate design decision that the algorithms are fully | > specified. The goal is precisely to not allow you (as an implementor) to | > change them.. ;-) | > Of course the fact that hash_range gives the same result as hash_value | > on the corresponding container is no accident, either. | | Yes, the reason that this came up, is because this wasn't true for | Jeremy's original implementation. But I think his hash function for | strings was faster, which might be desirable. Peter, I don't like that hasing a string is suboptimal. Likewise, I would like hasing of sub_range<string> or sub_range<vector<char>> to be really fast. So if the goal is portability, then why don't we just find a suitable *fast* way to do it whenever the value-type is char or wchar_t and specify all the details of that function? -Thorsten