Do not use hashValue in comparison#44
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Member
|
Hi @siyusong, |
inamiy
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2016
Do not use hashValue in comparison
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi @inamiy,
First of all, thank you for creating this amazing library!
When exploring the codebase, I found that
hashValues are used in comparison in a few places. This seems a logic error:x == yimpliesx.hashValue == y.hashValue, but not the other way around. Therefore, usinghashValuein comparison, technically speaking, is not reliable because of potential hash collision.I understand that in many cases, we are comparing two hash value generated by SwiftState classes, and hash collision is unlikely/impossible. However, the concrete Event/State types will be implemented by the client (user of SwiftState), so there is no way to guarantee that hash collision won't happen.
I have removed all occurrences of comparison of
hashValues, and reimplemented them using plain old pattern matching. Please let me know your thoughts on this.