Re: more default hash functions taylanbayirli@xxxxxx 16 Oct 2015 16:12 UTC

Alex Shinn <> writes:

> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 10:53 PM, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer
> <> wrote:
>     I believe (make-hashtable symbol-hash eq?) should suffice?
> Because if the implementation _doesn't_ provide
> special case optimizations, then this is just an eq
> table, in which case exposing symbol-hash would
> expose eq-hash.

Sorry, I still don't understand.  If an implementation has an internal
eq-hash whose results change between GC runs, then wouldn't (define
symbol-hash eq-hash) be an illegal implementation for symbol-hash?

I had not thought about this issue before at all, but from what I can
tell, it means that an implementation with a moving GC needs to do
something special for symbol-hash anyway.