<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:23, Dave Goodell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:goodell@mcs.anl.gov">goodell@mcs.anl.gov</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div id=":1r6">Also, if you only need to check for datatype compatibility and not all of the other issues listed in our paper, you probably would benefit from the hashing scheme developed by Langou et al.: <a href="http://www.springerlink.com/content/6xdbmmva33cwvj33/" target="_blank">http://www.springerlink.com/content/6xdbmmva33cwvj33/</a><br>
<br>
I'm not sure how to obtain a copy of that code though at this point. The listed web page for downloading it is offline and <a href="http://archive.org" target="_blank">archive.org</a> does not seem to have a copy.</div>
</blockquote></div><br><div>Hmm, this looks neat, but since my check for equivalence is necessary for correctness (rather than just error detection), it's important to not have collisions. A hash could be used to quickly identify negatives, but I would still need a collision-free check eventually.</div>