From owner-cvs-all  Tue Apr 24 10:43:39 2001
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu [18.24.4.193])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id ED61037B424; Tue, 24 Apr 2001 10:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu)
Received: (from wollman@localhost)
	by khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA97478;
	Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:43:33 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from wollman)
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 13:43:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-Id: <200104241743.NAA97478@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
To: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/stdlib rand.3 rand.c
In-Reply-To: <200104230229.f3N2TA082491@freefall.freebsd.org>
References: <200104230229.f3N2TA082491@freefall.freebsd.org>
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

<<On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 19:29:10 -0700 (PDT), "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@FreeBSD.org> said:

>   Add sranddev() since srand() is not vary much with seed, typical time
  
This seems utterly pointless to me.  The only reason that any program
would use rand()/srand() is because those are the official interfaces
specified in ISO 9899.  No program would ever use an sranddev()
interface; if strict ISO 9899 conformance is not necessary, a better
PRNG (such as random() or arc4random()) would have been used.

-GAWollman


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message