Re: advice on hash tables?

[Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> I don't want to have to specify what type of characters I'm using, I'd
>> like to just treat all types of characters as the same. The brute-force
>> solution would be redundant hash-table entries, one each for simplified
>> and traditional characters. That would double the size of the hash table
>> to 200,000+.
>
> If the mapping from traditional characters to simplified characters
> a function?  If so, I suggest you use as key the simplified characters
> version, and then when looking things up, you first apply the
> simplification function.

Is there a traditional-to-simplified reduction function? That's a good
question, there might be. I will take a look and see, but something
tells me there isn't. That could be a useful intermediate step, though.