[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] On Hash Collisions (28C3)

From: Thomas Bushnell, BSG
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] On Hash Collisions (28C3)
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 17:47:38 -0800

Huh? The point is that well-chosen hash collisions can force the algorithm into its worst case behavior, and if that's linear, it's a problem. Choosing a linear algorithm to begin with is hardly a win! 

On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 4:35 PM, John Cowan <address@hidden> wrote:
Jörg F. Wittenberger scripsit:

> I have not figured whether or not chicken would be vulnerable.
> Anybody able to do so?

A simple and adequate resolution would be to discard the use of a
hashtable in this case in favor of an a-list, so that there is no
possibility of a hash collision.

John Cowan  address@hidden
Consider the matter of Analytic Philosophy.  Dennett and Bennett are well-known.
Dennett rarely or never cites Bennett, so Bennett rarely or never cites Dennett.
There is also one Dummett.  By their works shall ye know them.  However, just as
no trinities have fourth persons (Zeppo Marx notwithstanding), Bummett is hardly
known by his works.  Indeed, Bummett does not exist.  It is part of the function
of this and other e-mail messages, therefore, to do what they can to create him.

Chicken-hackers mailing list

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]