>>>>> "wtw" == William T Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
wtw> Well, what do you expect, working libraries on DOS? :) The
The ANSI standard stipulates that rand() returns an int if I recall
correctly. Hence the library implementors had no choice.
wtw> random number generator under Linux is reasonably good, as good
wtw> as any quick-and-dirty generator is. It's a 32 bit generator
The best C RNG I'm yet aware of is definitely quick-and-dirty. It's
due to George Marsaglia. If you're interested, you could find it on
DejaNews. He posted it in this article:-
> Subject: A RANDOM NUMBER GENERATOR FOR C
> From: George Marsaglia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 1997/09/29
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Newsgroups: sci.math
wtw> and the low bits are just as random as the high bits.
wtw> random() is better than rand(), but only because you can set
wtw> more options on the function call. rand() is probably there
wtw> for compatibility.
...with the ISO and ANSI C standards!
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
