Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add BuildHasher::hash_one as unstable #86151

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jun 25, 2021
Merged

Conversation

scottmcm
Copy link
Member

@scottmcm scottmcm commented Jun 8, 2021

Inspired by https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/86140/files#diff-246941135168fbc44fce120385ee9c3156e08a1c3e2697985b56dcb8d728eedeR2416, where I wanted to write a quick test for a Hash implementation and it took more of a dance than I'd hoped.

It looks like this would be handy in hashtable implementations, too -- a quick look at hashbrown found two places where it needs to do the same dance:
https://github.com/rust-lang/hashbrown/blob/6302512a8a514fe5bd442464ebcd78139c82e1e2/src/map.rs#L247-L270

I wanted to get a "seems plausible" from a libs member before making a tracking issue, so random-sampling the intersection of highfive and governance gave me...
r? @joshtriplett

(As always, bikeshed away! And let me know if I missed something obvious again that I should have used instead.)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Jun 8, 2021
@scottmcm scottmcm added the T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Jun 8, 2021
@joshtriplett
Copy link
Member

Minor bikeshed: I think hash_one would more clearly delineate the "just one thing" use case, rather than hash_of.

That aside, this seems like a reasonable helper to me.

@scottmcm scottmcm changed the title Add BuildHasher::hash_of as unstable Add BuildHasher::hash_one as unstable Jun 9, 2021
@scottmcm
Copy link
Member Author

Friendly 2-week ping on this, @joshtriplett

@joshtriplett
Copy link
Member

@bors r+ rollup

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 25, 2021

📌 Commit 579d19b has been approved by joshtriplett

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Jun 25, 2021
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 25, 2021

⌛ Testing commit 579d19b with merge 50e0cc5...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 25, 2021

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: joshtriplett
Pushing 50e0cc5 to master...

@bors bors added the merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. label Jun 25, 2021
@bors bors merged commit 50e0cc5 into rust-lang:master Jun 25, 2021
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.55.0 milestone Jun 25, 2021
@scottmcm scottmcm deleted the simple-hash-of branch October 4, 2021 03:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants