Re: hash_lookup

[Sam S. <sd...@gn...>]

> * Bruno Haible <oe...@py...t> [2004-06-08 18:47:33 +0200]:
>
> Sam wrote:
>> Now, why did you add :KEY-TYPE and :VALUE-TYPE?
>
> 1) Tomorrow I will change the hash table test of many hash tables to
> STABLEHASH-EQ or STABLEHASH-EQUAL, to avoid burdening the generational
> GC.  To find out the best test it is necessary to know the key
> type. Maybe someday I'll compute the test from the key type.

so, for now they are ignored, right?
maybe we should save them and add a test to PUTHASH - IIUC, PUTHASH is
not speed-critical, at least not to the degree that GETHASH is.

BTW, you did not document them in the impnotes either.

>> (and why didn't you bump O(version)?!)
>
> Because it's easier for you to do 'rm -f *.fas' than for me to do a
> cvs commit.

I am sorry, I don't quite understand this.
I don't see why bumping O(version) is any different from writing a
proper ChangeLog or NEWS entry or checking for GC-safety or not mixing
up formatting and substantial changes.

I can imagine that you are reluctant to do a full *.d recompile that
is forces by each O(version) change, but this is a non-issue:

1. on modern computers this takes just a few minutes

2. you are constantly touching lispbibl.d with the same effect anyway

3. you can move it from there to, say, spvw.d and it will speed
   compilation



-- 
Sam Steingold (http://www.podval.org/~sds) running w2k
<http://www.camera.org> <http://www.iris.org.il> <http://www.memri.org/>
<http://www.mideasttruth.com/> <http://www.honestreporting.com>
Rhinoceros has poor vision, but, due to his size, it's not his problem.