Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #37064 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-01-19 08:53 +0100 |
| Last post | 2013-01-19 08:53 +0100 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Any built-in ishashable method ? Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2013-01-19 08:53 +0100
| From | Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-01-19 08:53 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: Any built-in ishashable method ? |
| Message-ID | <mailman.674.1358582016.2939.python-list@python.org> |
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 top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web