3 ms·
I strongly disagree with this idea - code should always be released! If it's good, we can avoid rewriting code and have more options for hashing, and if some pe
by rjeli 9y ago
I strongly disagree with this idea - code should always be released! If it's good, we can avoid rewriting code and have more options for hashing, and if some people point out problems with the code, the author can learn from their mistakes and fix them if possible - they wouldn't want to use it in their private code with the mistakes.
I think this thread is more negative than the author deserves. The method of hashing is novel and could possibly lead to exploration in the area, and if not that, where else could the author post to get feedback from the author of murmurhash??
I think the only problem here is that they advertise it as production ready/universal without evidence or rigorous testing, rather than "hey, here's a cool hash I came up with."
- AstralStorm 9y agoIndeed. That claim requires hard statistics on performance on multiple platforms and statistics of the hash function itself. The floating point hash might be useful on a CPU for example.
- jimktrains2 9y ago> I strongly disagree with this idea - code should always be released! There is a difference between releasing code, say on github, and putting it out there like it's ready for use in a production system, like in a package manager. I only said the later shouldn't be done, not the former. Rereading, I guess that wasn't exactly what I said. I can't seem to edit now, though.
- 19eightyfour 9y agoThanks for sticking up for me, rjeli, I really appreciate that!