Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 5 Oct 1996 08:53:49 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Thomas David Rivers <ponds!rivers@dg-rtp.dg.com>
To:        ache@nagual.ru, ponds!uriah.heep.sax.de!joerg_wunsch
Cc:        ponds!freebsd.org!current, ponds!freebsd.org!freebsd-hackers
Subject:   Re: I plan to change random() for -current (was Re: rand() and random())
Message-ID:  <199610051253.IAA05170@lakes.water.net>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 
> > I don't think so.  But they are much better with random().  See xmine,
> > if you wanna get a nice example.  It generates totally predictable
> > layouts when using rand().
> 
> Totally predictable layouts not rand() illness only but random() too.
> It not depends well on different initial state, producing the same
> sequence. I finally dig out initial posting (below).
> 
> IMHO we need to change our random() as suggested.
> 

 When working with the Data General runtime library's on AOS/VS (remember
that?) we discovered a similar situation - our rand() wasn't random...

 A user had sent in a marvelous demonstration of this - generate several
thousand X/Y pairs with calls to rand() and make a scatter plot of them.
(i.e. a monte-carlo idea..)  When we plotted these points, we got
a definite line!!!!

 I agree - fix rand()...

	- Dave R. -



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199610051253.IAA05170>