Thanks for answering guys. Yes José is right, hashing the pointer wasn’t even a
good solution so I used another hash. I had the pointers stored in another data
type and I wanted to quickly test for the their entry in the table but I found
another way.
> On Jan 30, 2017, at 4:28 PM, José Mejuto <joshy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> After addressing the ^ conversion showed by other people I have a question.
> Why you need to hash a pointer ? Hashing a value is interesting to reduce its
> compare time (taking collisions into account) and/or verify message
> integrity, and hashing a pointer does not meet none of this goals as it is
> process wide unique (no collisions) and its size is the fastest compare
> operation (most architectures).
Regards,
Ryan Joseph
_______________________________________________
fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
