At the end of the intro of the documentation, it is mentioned that the implementation relies on a C++ implementation of SwissTables.
This page contains illustrations about two variants: « flat » and « node » based.
The main difference between these two variants is pointer stability.
In the « node » based version, the key-value pairs, once inserted, keep their address in memory even if the hash is reorganised.
In the « flat » version, some insertions/removals can make the previous key-value pairs be moved in memory.
When it comes to the Rust implementation, I am not experienced enough to be certain of any specific detail, but I tried this simple example based on yours.
use std::collections::HashMap;
fn main() {
let name = vec![
String::from("Charlie"),
String::from("Winston"),
String::from("Brian"),
String::from("Jack"),
];
let age = vec![50, 5, 7, 21];
let mut people_ages: HashMap<String, i32> =
name.into_iter().zip(age.into_iter()).collect();
let mut keys = Vec::new();
let mut values = Vec::new();
for (key, value) in &people_ages {
keys.push(key);
values.push(value);
let key_addr = key as *const String as usize;
let value_addr = value as *const i32 as usize;
println!("{:x} {:x} {}: {}", key_addr, value_addr, key, value);
}
// people_ages.insert("Bob".to_owned(), 4); // mutable and immutable borrow
println!("keys: {:?}", keys);
println!("values: {:?}", values);
}
/*
55e08ff8bd40 55e08ff8bd58 Brian: 7
55e08ff8bd20 55e08ff8bd38 Charlie: 50
55e08ff8bd00 55e08ff8bd18 Winston: 5
55e08ff8bce0 55e08ff8bcf8 Jack: 21
keys: ["Brian", "Charlie", "Winston", "Jack"]
values: [7, 50, 5, 21]
*/
The commented out line (insertion) is rejected because we cannot alter the hashmap while keeping references to its content.
Thus, I guess (I'm not certain) that the implementation does not rely on the « node » based variant since we cannot take benefit of the pointer stability it provides (due to the ownership model in Rust), and probably it relies on the « flat » variant.
This means that we can expect that the key-value pairs associated with the same hash are tightly packed in memory, and iterating over them should be very similar to iterating over a vector: regular progression (with some skips however) very friendly with cache prefetch.
Printing the addresses tends to confirm that guess (however the test is not complete enough), and shows a backward progression.