Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 23:37:18 +0400 (MSD) From: "=?KOI8-R?Q?=E1=CE=C4=D2=C5=CA_=FE=C5=D2=CE=CF=D7?=" (Andrey A. Chernov) <ache@nagual.ru> To: terry@lambert.org (Terry Lambert) Cc: wollman@lcs.mit.edu, terry@lambert.org, joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org, bde@zeta.org.au Subject: Re: I plan to change random() for -current (was Re: rand() and random()) Message-ID: <199610071937.XAA04969@nagual.ru> In-Reply-To: <199610071850.LAA14614@phaeton.artisoft.com> from "Terry Lambert" at "Oct 7, 96 11:50:42 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Here we have an issue where the technical merit is relative: it depends > on if you depends on the "random" behaviour" or if you depends on the > "pseudo" behaviour. This is the main ideological debate. Your "pseudo" idea is technically wrong. Standard says that ([...] my comments) "THIS function [NOT all possible old and future implementations of this function] produce the same sequence for same seed". -- Andrey A. Chernov <ache@nagual.ru> http://www.nagual.ru/~ache/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610071937.XAA04969>