Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.010 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.98; '*S*': 0.00; 'instance,': 0.05; 'python': 0.08; '*is*': 0.09; 'subject:string': 0.09; 'received:209.85.210.174': 0.13; 'received:mail- iy0-f174.google.com': 0.13; 'fixed.': 0.15; 'from:addr:rosuav': 0.16; 'from:name:chris angelico': 0.16; 'pythons': 0.16; 'roy': 0.16; 'mon,': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'dec': 0.22; 'header:In-Reply- To:1': 0.22; 'code': 0.25; 'function': 0.27; 'fact': 0.27; 'bugs': 0.28; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.28; 'pm,': 0.29; 'subject:?': 0.31; 'source': 0.31; 'does': 0.32; 'certainly': 0.32; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.34; 'things': 0.34; 'doc': 0.34; 'platforms.': 0.34; 'but': 0.37; 'received:google.com': 0.37; 'received:209.85': 0.38; 'received:209': 0.40; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; '2011': 0.61; 'provided': 0.62; '26,': 0.67; 'stated': 0.68; 'details.': 0.72; 'constitute': 0.91 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=asuFnyNgaAueXodxMU7lCQOSe6D7Yfsywum1roZwghc=; b=InTW/u6eA/swS70d1V2ZJPOZvuos3WvYh1RsoXFoY/QsMkl/XzEvueMRyRWT4ig9Vt JdGcDbsFUkS5fPXNtRQ+hpkiTEXhu/AYIOIKG/25+dtZdv0D7fF2SDyQSvSw4Y3os9zs ISwEa+uxRmfxC4Lh3MCgO+Xs29ZZSV33nlldw= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4ef7299f$0$29973$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <4ef74572$0$29973$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <4ef75afc$0$29973$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <4ef7e337$0$29973$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2011 15:26:48 +1100 Subject: Re: Random string of digits? From: Chris Angelico To: python-list@python.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 16 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1324873612 news.xs4all.nl 6928 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:40348 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:17946 On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Roy Smith wrote: > Of course it is. =A0Those things constitute doc bugs which need to get > fixed. =A0The fact that the specification is flawed does not change the > fact that it *is* the specification. Also, the specification is what can be trusted across multiple implementations of Python - the source can't. I don't intend to get the source code to five Pythons to ascertain whether getrandbits() is provided in the default random.Random() of each of them. Now, in this particular instance, it IS stated in the docs - just down in the individual function descriptions, which I hadn't read - so I almost certainly CAN trust that across all platforms. But in the general case, I would not want to make firm statements on the basis of implementation details. ChrisA