News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Git archive generation meets Hyrum's law. Parent comment

Re:Git archive generation meets Hyrum's law by cpeterso on Thursday February 02, 2023 @09:48PM (#34636529)
Hyrum’s Law applies, even when you take into account Hyrum’s Law. :)

A story about a Golang program that had assumed map iteration was uniformly random but it’s not, which caused a load balancer to assign work unevenly:

https://dev.to/wallyqs/gos-map-iteration-order-is-not-that-r...

A graph of the map iteration order’s distribution showing that it’s not uniformly random:

https://twitter.com/cafxx/status/1135190309514620928

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Git archive generation meets Hyrum's law by akkartik on Thursday February 02, 2023 @11:10PM (#34637053)
Ok, you win, have a favorite.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Git archive generation meets Hyrum's law by 0xjnml on Friday February 03, 2023 @03:41AM (#34638780)
From the language specification: "The iteration order over maps is not specified and is not guaranteed to be the same from one iteration to the next."

There's a long shot between "not specified" and "uniformly random".

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Git archive generation meets Hyrum's law by pwdisswordfishc on Friday February 03, 2023 @03:47AM (#34638819)
The joke is that the sort of people who rely on apparent behaviour in practice isn’t the sort that tends to look things up in specifications.
[ Parent | on HN ]