Ricardo Mestre wrote:
> While checking if there was still a score file on trek(6) I found that
> it was still using random(), and inspired by the code on NetBSD and
> OpenBSD relevant manpages I came up with this diff. Let's bring
> trek(6) to the 21st century, at least here :) Does it look good?
>
> [...]
>
> Index: ranf.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/games/trek/ranf.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.5
> diff -u -p -u -r1.5 ranf.c
> --- ranf.c 27 Oct 2009 23:59:27 -0000 1.5
> +++ ranf.c 25 Nov 2015 20:19:47 -0000
> @@ -33,23 +33,17 @@
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
>
> -int
> -ranf(max)
> - int max;
> +uint32_t
> +ranf(uint32_t max)
> {
> - int t;
> -
> if (max <= 0)
> return (0);
> - t = random() >> 5;
> - return (t % max);
> + return (arc4random_uniform(max));
> }
>
>
Why not just replace ranf with arc4random_uniform? That condition looks
like a nop because max is unsigned and arc4random_uniform returns 0 when
its arg is < 2. So this patch makes ranf an alias of arc4random_uniform.
Also:
* what was the point of the shift-right-by-five in the original code?
* are you sure that changing the type of this function doesn't have any
downstream effects?
I like this idea, though.
