Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.python > #5911

Re: hash values and equality

From Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Subject Re: hash values and equality
Followup-To comp.lang.python
Date 2011-05-21 11:24 +0200
Organization None
Message-ID <ir80ci$q5u$1@solani.org> (permalink)
References (6 earlier) <BANLkTi=_GqrNntRU7pv7x=kj3gHurk-Gaw@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.1822.1305870290.9059.python-list@python.org> <0deha8-6u9.ln1@satorlaser.homedns.org> <mailman.1850.1305915987.9059.python-list@python.org> <93pb5nF3gtU1@mid.individual.net>

Followups directed to: comp.lang.python

Show all headers | View raw


Gregory Ewing wrote:

> Ethan Furman wrote:
>> Ulrich Eckhardt wrote:
>> 
>>> If two equal objects have different hashes, they
>>> will be stored in different places in the hash map. Looking for
>>> object1 will then not turn up with object2, even though they are equal.
>> 
>> In this case this is the behavior I want.
> 
> You can't rely on it, though. The hash value gets reduced
> modulo the size of the dict, so even if two objects have
> different hashes, in some cases they will land on the same
> dict slot anyway.
> 
> So an object such as you're postulating would behave
> unpredictably when used as a dict key. Sometimes a lookup
> using a different but equal object would find it, and
> sometimes not, seemingly at random.

I think for every potential match the current dict implementation checks 
identity, then hashes -- and equality only if the hash values are equal. The 
relevant function is lookdict() in dictobject.c.

While that means that the problem you describe cannot occur a simple 
approach that avoids relying on an implementation detail (?) would be to use 
(hash(obj), obj) tuples instead of just obj as the key.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

hash values and equality Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-19 22:43 -0700
  Re: hash values and equality Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2011-05-20 08:38 +0200
    Re: hash values and equality Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-20 10:57 -0700
    Re: hash values and equality Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2011-05-20 22:25 +0200
    Re: hash values and equality Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-20 14:48 -0700
  Re: hash values and equality Ulrich Eckhardt <ulrich.eckhardt@dominolaser.com> - 2011-05-20 08:33 +0200
    Re: hash values and equality MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2011-05-20 16:50 +0100
    Re: hash values and equality Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-05-21 02:20 +1000
    Re: hash values and equality Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 11:59 -0600
    Re: hash values and equality Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-05-20 11:38 -0700
      Re: hash values and equality Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2011-05-21 20:24 +1200
        Re: hash values and equality Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2011-05-21 11:24 +0200
    Re: hash values and equality Christian Heimes <lists@cheimes.de> - 2011-05-20 21:01 +0200
    Re: hash values and equality MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2011-05-20 21:17 +0100
      Re: hash values and equality Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-21 00:47 +0000
        Re: hash values and equality MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2011-05-21 02:02 +0100
          Re: hash values and equality Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-21 01:55 +0000
    Re: hash values and equality John Nagle <nagle@animats.com> - 2011-05-21 15:55 -0700
      Re: hash values and equality Irmen de Jong <irmen.NOSPAM@xs4all.nl> - 2011-05-22 01:07 +0200
      Re: hash values and equality Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-05-22 00:24 +0000

csiph-web