Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 10:14:40 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: jkh@time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: rkw@dataplex.net, terry@lambert.org, ache@nagual.ru, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: I plan to change random() for -current (was Re: rand() and random()) Message-ID: <199610071714.KAA14258@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <2689.844682008@time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Oct 7, 96 02:53:28 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > This discussion should probably be made in a Numerical Analysis arena. > > It is not a topic of debate for OS people. > > Which is, of course, an utterly ridiculous thing to say since the OS > people are still faced with *implementing* a practical solution for > which the numerical analysis people are little help at all - ask them > for a practical solution and they'll hand you a 50 page paper > describing "the tao of randomness", of great interest perhaps to the > most die-hard crypto weenies but not to the general user populace > whom the *OS* people have to answer to. It seems to me that any attempt to change the status quo is driven by "the tao of randomness" and more specifically, the fact that the existing code doesn't measure up to someone's idea of "what the tao is". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610071714.KAA14258>