Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #37064
| From | Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Any built-in ishashable method ? |
| Date | 2013-01-19 08:53 +0100 |
| Organization | None |
| References | <kdbb94$hqa$1@ger.gmane.org> <627444785.6706139.1358510169194.JavaMail.root@sequans.com> <kdbdr4$7fl$1@ger.gmane.org> <50f9f8a6.85ee440a.41aa.3094@mx.google.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.674.1358582016.2939.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
Kushal Kumaran wrote: > Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> writes: > >> Jean-Michel Pichavant wrote: >> >>> That brings me to another question, is there any valid test case where >>> key1 != key2 and hash(key1) == hash(key2) ? Or is it some kind of design >>> flaw ? >> >> I don't think there is a use case for such a behaviour other than >> annoying your collegues ;) >> > > It's fairly common. The set of possible keys can be much larger > (possibly infinite) than the set of possible hash values (restricted to > 32-bit or 64-bit integer values, afaict). Sorry, I misread the quoted text. If you replace key1 != key2 and hash(key1) == hash(key2) in Jean-Michel's question with key1 == key2 and hash(key1) != hash(key2) my reply should start to make sense...
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Any built-in ishashable method ? Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2013-01-19 08:53 +0100
csiph-web