I always wanted to have an array where I could store an object at index 694307084175882649501.

And now I can!!!

Cool, I named mine reasons_why_im_single

Hash/Dict.

@Root slowdowns when these collections grow bigger, possibility of collisions. Hashes of identical objects between 2 JVMs are not guaranteed to be identical.

@netikras Fair. There are definitely edgecases.

I haven't experienced slowdowns on large hashes though. Why would this happen?

@Root hashmap in java does iterate over a list of entries comparing their hash:long field value to provided object's hash value. This iteration causes O(n). My array is almost O(1) :)

@netikras That's a terrible hash implementation 😅
It's supposed to be O(1) by design!

But your array implementation sounds amazing. Good work!

@Root what implementations of hash provide o[1]?

@irene meeh, maybe someday 😁 maybe I should commercialize it...? 😁

@ihatecomputers I think I'll name mine 'idk_how_shes_still_with_me'

Index -1 or 0.3 would also be nice

@ddephor tbd :)

@netikras @irene I did say "supposed to be" not "are" ☹

@netikras
Just fyi, it used to be O(n) but isn't anymore:

"To address this issue, Java 8 hash elements use balanced trees instead of linked lists after a certain threshold is reached, [...] which will improve the worst case performance from O(n) to O(log n)."
(https://geeksforgeeks.org/internal-...)