On 21 Nov 2018, at 19:45, Eliot Miranda eliot.miranda@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
right now we have the following definition of Large(Positive)Integer>>hash:hash ^ByteArray hashBytes: self startingWith: self species hash
which means that for all integers outside of the 32-bit SmallInteger range (-2 ^ 30 to 2 ^ 30 - 1), the 32-bit system and the 64-bit system answer different values for hash.
e.g. in 64 bits: (2 raisedTo: 30) hash 1073741824 but in 32 bits: (2 raisedTo: 30) hash 230045764
This is unsatisfactory. I propose changing Large(Positive)Integer>>hash to
hash ^self digitLength <= 8 ifTrue: [self] ifFalse: [ByteArray hashBytes: self startingWith: self species hash]
Thanks, I added an issue tracker entry: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22690/32-vs-64-bits-and-large-integer-hash
I will do a pull request later (if not someone else is faster to do it).
Marcus
-- Marcus Denker -- marcus@2denker.de http://www.zweidenker.de