Sorry, was away on vacation last week. The back story on that make_hash2 is at [1].
Given that the patch never landed we can fall back to the proposed work around there. We can just call erlang:phash2/1 on each key and pass that into the NIF. While it won't allow us to easily reimplement ETS it should be more than fine for this case. [1] http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-patches/2013-February/003532.html On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Robert Samuel Newson <[email protected]> wrote: > How about this; > > 1) When built on Windows, the khash_hash_fun insists that the key term is an > erlang binary and we hash that. > > 2) When built on Windows, the functions in khash.erl call term_to_binary > before calling down to the NIF functions. > > B. > > sketch; > > #ifndef _WIN32 > hash_val_t > khash_hash_fun(const void* obj) > { > khnode_t* node = (khnode_t*) obj; > return (hash_val_t) make_hash2(node->key); > } > #else > hash_val_t > khash_hash_fun(const void* obj) > { > khnode_t* node = (khnode_t*) obj; > Eterm term = node->key; > if (ERL_IS_BINARY(term)) { > void* data = ERL_BIN_PTR(term); > int len = ERL_BIN_SIZE(term); > return hash(data, len); // TODO, write hash function > } > else { > return (hash_val_t) make_hash2(node->key); > } > } > #endif > > >> On 12 Jul 2015, at 09:14, Nick North <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I'm with Dave - it would be acceptable to ship a modified BEAM if it's a >> short-term measure. It's not great, but better than not having Windows >> support. >> >> Nick >> >> On Sun, 12 Jul 2015 at 08:35 Dave Cottlehuber <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2015, at 09:21 AM, Dave Cottlehuber wrote: >>>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2015, at 08:35 AM, Joan Touzet wrote: >>>>> I scoured the mailing lists but was unable to find any sort of patch >>>>> for this, submitted or not. It's certainly not landed in v18.0.x. >>>>> >>>>> Perhaps Paul is aware of the patch as a starting place at least? >>> >>> Um I should also say that in the distant past, I built & shipped >>> modified BEAMs, although that was just to fix up patches that had been >>> accepted but not released. e.g. >>> http://people.apache.org/~dch/snapshots/1.1.1/ >>> >>> So I'm not averse to that if we have a patch that's been submitted >>> upstream and a reasonable expectation of success. In my experience there >>> are only a handful of people who have built from source on Windows... >>> >>> — >>> Dave Cottlehuber >>> [email protected] >>> Sent from my Couch >>> >
