Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 04:04:34 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: areilly@bigpond.net.au (Andrew Reilly) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), roam@orbitel.bg (Peter Pentchev), ache@nagual.pp.ru (Andrey A. Chernov), n@nectar.com (Jacques A. Vidrine), arch@FreeBSD.ORG, kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: rand.c patch for review (was: Re: cvs commit: ports/astro/xglobe/files patch-random) Message-ID: <200102270404.VAA11459@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <20010227144408.A34881@gurney.reilly.home> from "Andrew Reilly" at Feb 27, 2001 02:44:08 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Sure, rand() should produce the same results after successive > calls to srand() with the same seed: that's what the spec says. > Nothing anywhere has ever said that these _sequences_ should be > portable between machines. Historically, they have been, whether or not someone has said they should be is not relevent, since they have been derived from common source code. I remember when the standard rand() went into the FreeBSD source base; almost immediately thereafter, I added patches to the f2c math library, and began using FreeBSD as a science platform. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200102270404.VAA11459>