Message157254
| Author |
gvanrossum |
| Recipients |
Arfrever, Jim.Jewett, asvetlov, gregory.p.smith, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, pitrou, r.david.murray, skrah, vstinner |
| Date |
2012年04月01日.04:00:01 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1333252802.42.0.271694929012.issue14417@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
But the sleep(0.1) forces a thread switch so I consider that still cheating -- nobody in their right mind would consider calling sleep() inside __hash__.
You can probably get it to fail without this by just doing a bunch of random computation in the __hash__ (and using a low sys.setswitchinterval() value). Or consider creating a key that consists of e.g. a tuple of 100 or 1000 Key instances -- hashing that will call the __hash__ on each of those, wasting a lot of cycles. |
|