Hello Pascal!

Replying to a message of Pascal Schmidt to Darin McBride:

 PS> Hi Darin! :-)

 PS>>> That one is very memory efficient, though, and good enough for 
 PS>>> smaller input sets. Think about using your approach for 64 bit 
 PS>>> integers, how much memory would your hash table consume?
 DM>> With a reasonable hash algorithm, not much more space than the 
 DM>> original list ;-)
 PS> Sure, but what's a good hash for random numbers? ;)

Not that I'm an expert or anything, but I would assume that if you created
an array that is the prime number equal to either the size of the list, or
the next prime number after that, and then just used % to come up with the
entry, you stand a pretty good chance of few collisions.

Darin

---