You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is a low-priority issue as these are edge-cases. I just want to report this here so that this is known (and before I forget).
lib.hash does not sort table keys, which can lead to false cache-misses. The reason for this is that (to the best of my current knowledge) table key iteration order is not well-defined (or, in other words, is unspecified) in Lua. The effect is that two different tables (instances) with the same exact content can produce different hashes:
Edit: never-mind, the example above seems to be working for me now?
lib.hash is not prefix-free, and suffers from prefix collisions (although in practice, given the expected content that we are hashing, these collisions are probably very unlikely). This can result in false cache-hits:
Note
This is a low-priority issue as these are edge-cases. I just want to report this here so that this is known (and before I forget).
lib.hash
does not sort table keys, which can lead to false cache-misses. The reason for this is that (to the best of my current knowledge) table key iteration order is not well-defined (or, in other words, is unspecified) in Lua. The effect is that two different tables (instances) with the same exact content can produce different hashes:lib.hash
is not prefix-free, and suffers from prefix collisions (although in practice, given the expected content that we are hashing, these collisions are probably very unlikely). This can result in false cache-hits:The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: