On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Jeffrey Yasskin <jyass...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hash functions are already unstable across Python versions. Making > them unstable across interpreter processes (multiprocessing doesn't > share dicts, right?) doesn't sound like a big additional problem. > Users who want a distributed hash table will need to pull their own > hash function out of hashlib or re-implement a non-cryptographic hash > instead of using the built-in one, but they probably need to do that > already to allow themselves to upgrade Python. > Here's an idea. Suppose we add a sys.hash_seed or some such, that's settable to an int, and defaults to whatever we're using now. Then programs that want a fix can just set it to a random number, and on Python versions that support it, it takes effect. Everywhere else it's a silent no-op. Downside: sys has to have slots for this to work; does sys actually have slots? My memory's hazy on that. I guess actually it'd have to be sys.set_hash_seed(). But same basic idea. Anyway, this would make fixing the problem *possible*, while still pushing off the hard decisions to the app/framework developers. ;-) Downside: every hash operation includes one extra memory access, but strings only compute their hash once anyway.) Given that changing dict won't help, and changing the default hash is a non-starter, an option to set the seed is probably the way to go. (Maybe with an environment variable and/or command line option so users can work around old code.)
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
