You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As of version 0.4.10, rlang has hash(). We previously discussed about the alternative of digest::digest() (c.f. #4247 (comment)), and this seems the one, while at the moment we don't have strong motivation to migrate. I don't want to include this in the next release, but let's revisit here when it's done. I think rlang::hash() is good in that
it seems faster than digest::digest() for our usages, and
we'll have less dependencies since we already have rlang in Imports.
As of version 0.4.10, rlang has
hash()
. We previously discussed about the alternative ofdigest::digest()
(c.f. #4247 (comment)), and this seems the one, while at the moment we don't have strong motivation to migrate. I don't want to include this in the next release, but let's revisit here when it's done. I thinkrlang::hash()
is good in thatdigest::digest()
for our usages, andHere's the benchmark:
Created on 2021-04-30 by the reprex package (v2.0.0)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: