Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
acra-discuss
Home
+ new post
About this group
Join this group
Message from discussion Stacktrace hash
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
BoD  
View profile  
 More options Feb 18 2012, 1:59 pm
From: BoD <bodlu...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 19:59:58 +0100
Local: Sat, Feb 18 2012 1:59 pm
Subject: Re: [acra-discuss] Re: Stacktrace hash
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
Thanks for your reply Nikolay,

I am not sure why you would want the hash to be more 'specific' by
adding the class names here, as opposed to just keep the method names -
I have the impression the result would actually be the same, meaning it
would uniquely identify the crash in the vast majority of cases.

About md5: having a longer hash seems to me to be an inconvenient rather
than an advantage. For instance: "I just fixed crash 12345678" vs "I
just fixed crash 123456789abcdef01234".

OTOH speed is indeed important, but remember hashcode is a native method
(I don't know if the MessageDigest md5 apis are native). Not to mention
the code is also a bit simpler :)

--
BoD

On 02/18/2012 03:59 PM, Nikolay Elenkov wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 11:40 PM, BoD<bodlu...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Here is the patch.
> You are only using the method names, and that's stripping a lot of info.
> You might want to add at least the class name too, and maybe the file
> name. To get an unique identifier, a real hash function (e.g., SHA-1)
> might be more appropriate. That would give you a 20-byte ID, as
> opposed to the int's 4. It might actually be more efficient for large
> stack traces too: String.hashCode() loops over all characters and
> basically adds them together, and that might take some time for
> a large string.


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google