| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
We don't need the cryptographic strength of SHA-1 for this purpose, so we may as well use a faster hashing algorithm. While I was at it, I also sapped out the use of hash.end + hash.read combo for the faster and more conventional hash.update + hash.digest. In my local testing, this also seems to offer a nice speed boost.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks. Webpack did that too
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
We should land this change in master too? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Yes that's a good idea. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
And we can release this as a patch? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
We don't need the cryptographic strength of SHA-1 for this purpose, so
we may as well use a faster hashing algorithm.
While I was at it, I also sapped out the use of hash.end + hash.read
combo for the faster and more conventional hash.update + hash.digest. In
my local testing, this also seems to offer a nice speed boost.
Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements
What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)
What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)
Uses SHA-1 for cache filename hash.
What is the new behavior?
Uses MD4 for cache filename hash.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
Other information:
I wrote this PR against the 7.x branch in hopes that we could get it into a 7.x release. If you think this is a good approach, I am happy to open a similar PR against master.