String.GetHashCode () returns different values ​​in debug vs release, how to avoid this?

To my surprise, the following method gives a different result in debugging vs release:

int result = "test".GetHashCode();

Is there any way to avoid this?

I need a reliable way to hash the string, and I need the value to be consistent in debug and release mode. I would like to avoid writing my own hash function if possible.

Why is this happening?

FYI, the reflector gives me:

[ReliabilityContract(Consistency.WillNotCorruptState, Cer.MayFail), SecuritySafeCritical]
public override unsafe int GetHashCode()
{
    fixed (char* str = ((char*) this))
    {
        char* chPtr = str;
        int num = 0x15051505;
        int num2 = num;
        int* numPtr = (int*) chPtr;
        for (int i = this.Length; i > 0; i -= 4)
        {
            num = (((num << 5) + num) + (num >> 0x1b)) ^ numPtr[0];
            if (i <= 2)
            {
                break;
            }
            num2 = (((num2 << 5) + num2) + (num2 >> 0x1b)) ^ numPtr[1];
            numPtr += 2;
        }
        return (num + (num2 * 0x5d588b65));
    }
}
+5
source share
3 answers

GetHashCode() - , , 100% . , , , SHA-1:

using(System.Security.Cryptography.SHA1Managed hp = new System.Security.Cryptography.SHA1Managed()) {
    // Use hp.ComputeHash(System.Text.Encoding.ASCII (or Unicode, UTF8, UTF16, or UTF32 or something...).GetBytes(theString) to compute the hash code.
}

: - , SHA1Cng, , SHA1Managed.

+9

, , SHA, GetHasCode : # fast hash murmur2

"" , , , .

+3
    /// <summary>
    /// Default implementation of string.GetHashCode is not consistent on different platforms (x32/x64 which is our case) and frameworks. 
    /// FNV-1a - (Fowler/Noll/Vo) is a fast, consistent, non-cryptographic hash algorithm with good dispersion. (see http://isthe.com/chongo/tech/comp/fnv/#FNV-1a)
    /// </summary>
    private static int GetFNV1aHashCode(string str)
    {
        if (str == null)
            return 0;
        var length = str.Length;
        // original FNV-1a has 32 bit offset_basis = 2166136261 but length gives a bit better dispersion (2%) for our case where all the strings are equal length, for example: "3EC0FFFF01ECD9C4001B01E2A707"
        int hash = length;
        for (int i = 0; i != length; ++i)
            hash = (hash ^ str[i]) * 16777619;
        return hash;
    }

I assume that this implementation is slower than the unsafe posted here . But it is much simpler and safer. Works well if super speed is not needed.

0
source

All Articles