Yoshiki wrote:

>  I think it is not the case of the debugger problem.  But
>when you execute the following,
>
>((1 to: 100) select: [:i | s _ Set with: (Set with: 1 with: #a) with: 1.
>s includes: (Set with: 1 with: #a)]) size
>
>the answer is not 100.

Ah, sure enough; it's the hashing problem.



>  So, I propose to define Collection>>hash something like:
>----------
>hash
>	| hash index |
>	hash _ self species hash.
>	index _ 0.
>	self do: [:item |
>		(index _ index + 1) > 3 ifTrue: [^hash].
>		hash _ hash bitXor: (((hash bitShift: -6) bitOr: ((hash bitAnd: 16r3F) 
>bitShift: 6)) + item hash).
>	].
>	^hash.
>----------
>
>  How do you think?

This looks like it corresponds to the implementation of Collection>>= 
nicely, and should work for any kind of Collection.



     -- tim