Perfect Hashes and faster than memcmp

Re:Perfect Hashes and faster than memcmp by fake-name on Thursday March 19, 2015 @12:03AM (#9230135)

For the love of FSM, please don't call your library "phash". "phash" is already in wide use for "perceptual hash", or the hashing mechanisms used for things like fuzzy image searching.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Perfect Hashes and faster than memcmp by rurban on Thursday March 19, 2015 @03:13AM (#9230608)

Oh, I am on HN :)

Okay, point taken. I didn't know about this name. "pperf" maybe then. Note that this is still work in progress, I just had to finish another project, and will come back to this one soon.

EDIT: I've renamed the frontend to "pperf" now https://github.com/rurban/Perfect-Hash/commit/b475886f37d9

But the memcmp trick with unrolling of the comparisons beforehand for constant keys is already usable, and I believe someone already considered that optimization for gcc and llvm. If I remember I even saw a patch already. It should be used for switch statements with constant keys.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Perfect Hashes and faster than memcmp by octo_t on Thursday March 19, 2015 @11:10AM (#9232447)

I think this is the first time I've seen a person on HN be told "oh a product already exists with this name, maybe change it" and they actually have.

Props :)

[ Parent | on HN ]