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>