On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 05:04:57PM +0200, demerphq wrote:
question, it is true (and should be uncontroversial) that these changes
have done nothing to address the existence in and of itself of those
pathological cases, for which a broader fix would be required than just
changing up the hash function or twiddling its usage.
If you change the algorithm you completely change the memory profile,
performance profile and worst cases.

And you will probably break every XS module that deals with hashes.
That is obvious fearmongering - the XS API already works with data
structures other than perl hashes (tie...). Besides, breaking other
people's code isn't a problem for you, so why make it a problem for
others? That smells like dual standards.

Furthermore, changing the worst case and performance profile is the goal
both of your changes in the past as well as for a hypothetical security
fix. It's a required feature of such changes.

I am sure you will just call me wrong, without any evidence (or fall

                 The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
       -----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
       ----==-- _ generation
       ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
       --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / schmorp@schmorp.de
       -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase