在.NET中,GetHashCode方法在整个.NET基类库的许多地方都使用。正确执行它对于在集合中或确定相等时快速查找项目尤为重要。
对于如何为自定义类实现GetHashCode,是否有标准算法或最佳实践,以便不会降低性能?
在.NET中,GetHashCode方法在整个.NET基类库的许多地方都使用。正确执行它对于在集合中或确定相等时快速查找项目尤为重要。
对于如何为自定义类实现GetHashCode,是否有标准算法或最佳实践,以便不会降低性能?
当前回答
我的大部分工作都是通过数据库连接完成的,这意味着我的类都具有来自数据库的唯一标识符。我总是使用数据库中的ID来生成哈希代码。
// Unique ID from database
private int _id;
...
{
return _id.GetHashCode();
}
其他回答
这是我使用JonSkeet实现的助手类。
public static class HashCode
{
public const int Start = 17;
public static int Hash<T>(this int hash, T obj)
{
var h = EqualityComparer<T>.Default.GetHashCode(obj);
return unchecked((hash * 31) + h);
}
}
用法:
public override int GetHashCode()
{
return HashCode.Start
.Hash(_field1)
.Hash(_field2)
.Hash(_field3);
}
如果要避免为System.Int32编写扩展方法:
public readonly struct HashCode
{
private readonly int _value;
public HashCode(int value) => _value = value;
public static HashCode Start { get; } = new HashCode(17);
public static implicit operator int(HashCode hash) => hash._value;
public HashCode Hash<T>(T obj)
{
var h = EqualityComparer<T>.Default.GetHashCode(obj);
return unchecked(new HashCode((_value * 31) + h));
}
public override int GetHashCode() => _value;
}
它仍然避免了任何堆分配,使用方式完全相同:
public override int GetHashCode()
{
// This time `HashCode.Start` is not an `Int32`, it's a `HashCode` instance.
// And the result is implicitly converted to `Int32`.
return HashCode.Start
.Hash(_field1)
.Hash(_field2)
.Hash(_field3);
}
编辑(2018年5月):EqualityComparer<T>。默认getter现在是JIT内在的-Stephen Toub在这篇博文中提到了pull请求。
这是我的哈希码助手。它的优点是它使用泛型类型参数,因此不会导致装箱:
public static class HashHelper
{
public static int GetHashCode<T1, T2>(T1 arg1, T2 arg2)
{
unchecked
{
return 31 * arg1.GetHashCode() + arg2.GetHashCode();
}
}
public static int GetHashCode<T1, T2, T3>(T1 arg1, T2 arg2, T3 arg3)
{
unchecked
{
int hash = arg1.GetHashCode();
hash = 31 * hash + arg2.GetHashCode();
return 31 * hash + arg3.GetHashCode();
}
}
public static int GetHashCode<T1, T2, T3, T4>(T1 arg1, T2 arg2, T3 arg3,
T4 arg4)
{
unchecked
{
int hash = arg1.GetHashCode();
hash = 31 * hash + arg2.GetHashCode();
hash = 31 * hash + arg3.GetHashCode();
return 31 * hash + arg4.GetHashCode();
}
}
public static int GetHashCode<T>(T[] list)
{
unchecked
{
int hash = 0;
foreach (var item in list)
{
hash = 31 * hash + item.GetHashCode();
}
return hash;
}
}
public static int GetHashCode<T>(IEnumerable<T> list)
{
unchecked
{
int hash = 0;
foreach (var item in list)
{
hash = 31 * hash + item.GetHashCode();
}
return hash;
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Gets a hashcode for a collection for that the order of items
/// does not matter.
/// So {1, 2, 3} and {3, 2, 1} will get same hash code.
/// </summary>
public static int GetHashCodeForOrderNoMatterCollection<T>(
IEnumerable<T> list)
{
unchecked
{
int hash = 0;
int count = 0;
foreach (var item in list)
{
hash += item.GetHashCode();
count++;
}
return 31 * hash + count.GetHashCode();
}
}
/// <summary>
/// Alternative way to get a hashcode is to use a fluent
/// interface like this:<br />
/// return 0.CombineHashCode(field1).CombineHashCode(field2).
/// CombineHashCode(field3);
/// </summary>
public static int CombineHashCode<T>(this int hashCode, T arg)
{
unchecked
{
return 31 * hashCode + arg.GetHashCode();
}
}
此外,它还具有扩展方法来提供流畅的界面,因此您可以这样使用它:
public override int GetHashCode()
{
return HashHelper.GetHashCode(Manufacturer, PartN, Quantity);
}
或者像这样:
public override int GetHashCode()
{
return 0.CombineHashCode(Manufacturer)
.CombineHashCode(PartN)
.CombineHashCode(Quantity);
}
我的大部分工作都是通过数据库连接完成的,这意味着我的类都具有来自数据库的唯一标识符。我总是使用数据库中的ID来生成哈希代码。
// Unique ID from database
private int _id;
...
{
return _id.GetHashCode();
}
如果我们的财产不超过8处(希望如此),这里还有另一种选择。
ValueTuple是一个结构,似乎有一个可靠的GetHashCode实现。
这意味着我们可以简单地这样做:
// Yay, no allocations and no custom implementations!
public override int GetHashCode() => (this.PropA, this.PropB).GetHashCode();
让我们来看看.NETCore当前对ValueTuple的GetHashCode的实现。
这来自ValueTuple:
internal static int CombineHashCodes(int h1, int h2)
{
return HashHelpers.Combine(HashHelpers.Combine(HashHelpers.RandomSeed, h1), h2);
}
internal static int CombineHashCodes(int h1, int h2, int h3)
{
return HashHelpers.Combine(CombineHashCodes(h1, h2), h3);
}
这来自HashHelper:
public static readonly int RandomSeed = Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode();
public static int Combine(int h1, int h2)
{
unchecked
{
// RyuJIT optimizes this to use the ROL instruction
// Related GitHub pull request: dotnet/coreclr#1830
uint rol5 = ((uint)h1 << 5) | ((uint)h1 >> 27);
return ((int)rol5 + h1) ^ h2;
}
}
英语:
向左旋转(循环移位)h1 5个位置。将结果和h1相加。将结果与h2进行异或运算。首先对{static random seed,h1}执行上述操作。对于每个其他项目,对上一个结果和下一个项目(例如h2)执行操作。
如果能更多地了解这个ROL-5散列代码算法的财产,那就太好了。
遗憾的是,为我们自己的GetHashCode延迟ValueTuple可能不像我们希望的那样快。相关讨论中的这条评论说明了直接调用HashHelpers.Combine更具性能。另一方面,这是内部的,所以我们必须复制代码,牺牲了我们在这里获得的大部分。此外,我们将负责记住首先与随机种子结合。我不知道如果我们跳过这一步会有什么后果。
我在使用上面选择的实现时遇到了浮点和小数的问题。
此测试失败(浮点数;哈希值相同,即使我将2个值切换为负值):
var obj1 = new { A = 100m, B = 100m, C = 100m, D = 100m};
var obj2 = new { A = 100m, B = 100m, C = -100m, D = -100m};
var hash1 = ComputeHash(obj1.A, obj1.B, obj1.C, obj1.D);
var hash2 = ComputeHash(obj2.A, obj2.B, obj2.C, obj2.D);
Assert.IsFalse(hash1 == hash2, string.Format("Hashcode values should be different hash1:{0} hash2:{1}",hash1,hash2));
但是这个测试通过了(int):
var obj1 = new { A = 100m, B = 100m, C = 100, D = 100};
var obj2 = new { A = 100m, B = 100m, C = -100, D = -100};
var hash1 = ComputeHash(obj1.A, obj1.B, obj1.C, obj1.D);
var hash2 = ComputeHash(obj2.A, obj2.B, obj2.C, obj2.D);
Assert.IsFalse(hash1 == hash2, string.Format("Hashcode values should be different hash1:{0} hash2:{1}",hash1,hash2));
我改变了我的实现,不再对原始类型使用GetHashCode,它似乎工作得更好
private static int InternalComputeHash(params object[] obj)
{
unchecked
{
var result = (int)SEED_VALUE_PRIME;
for (uint i = 0; i < obj.Length; i++)
{
var currval = result;
var nextval = DetermineNextValue(obj[i]);
result = (result * MULTIPLIER_VALUE_PRIME) + nextval;
}
return result;
}
}
private static int DetermineNextValue(object value)
{
unchecked
{
int hashCode;
if (value is short
|| value is int
|| value is byte
|| value is sbyte
|| value is uint
|| value is ushort
|| value is ulong
|| value is long
|| value is float
|| value is double
|| value is decimal)
{
return Convert.ToInt32(value);
}
else
{
return value != null ? value.GetHashCode() : 0;
}
}
}