Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.math, comp.lang.c, comp.lang.fortran, comp.lang.pl1, comp.lang.ada |
| Subject | Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. |
| Date | 2011-04-29 14:09 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <91ukucFq9cU2@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <4dae2a4b$0$55577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> <4db90113$0$77724$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net> <ipbjqf$q4k$1@dont-email.me> <ipd5i2011p@news6.newsguy.com> |
Cross-posted to 5 groups.
On 04/29/11 01:50 PM, David Bernier wrote:
> e p chandler wrote:
>>
>>
>> "robin" wrote in message
>>
>> | So, what is all this? In particular, is there something special about
>> | the value of 3.7 billion?
>>
>>> No, nothing special at all.
>>> The purpose of the exercise is just to confirm that after generating
>>> 1000000000 random numbers, you get the same answer as George does.
>>
>> Alas, I think you are making some strong assumptions about the state of
>> computing in the hereafter.
>>
>
> All we have now are George Marsaglia's posts and writings.
> I know there's now a move on the way to 64-bit processors,
> which I take to mean the x86_64 or AMD64 design/instruction set.
The move happened several years ago (at least on the desktop and server).
> In any case, with an executable compiled with a C compiler,
> there's the function sizeof, which might be useful
> in some cases at run time.
Being pedantic, sizeof is a compile time operator when used with
integral types.
> For example, one could add to main() in C :
>
> printf("the size of an unsigned long in bytes is %d\n", sizeof(unsigned long));
Given the code as written, assert(sizeof(unsigned long) == 4) would be
more use.
> There's also the Itanium architecture and others, and even with a known
> processor, some compiler flags affect the number of bytes for
> some data types, such as "long double" with the -m64 flag
> on Fujitsu SPARC IV with Sun Solaris (--> 16 byte long
> doubles with the -m64 flag).
>
> AFAIK, sizeof(unsigned long) can be relied upon to give the size
> in 8-bit bytes of a C "unsigned long".
sizeof(unsigned long) is by definition the size in (not necessarily 8
bit) bytes of an unsigned long.
> Perhaps some documentation of language, machine, compiler, compiler
> options examples where KISS4691 works as per the Marsaglia
> specs could be helpful as a reference ...
I suggested long ago the code be updated to use fixed width types, thus
removing any ambiguities.
--
Ian Collins
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-04-28 11:14 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "e p chandler" <epc8@juno.com> - 2011-04-28 07:42 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Gib Bogle <g.bogle@auckland.ac.nz> - 2011-04-29 12:55 +1200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. David Bernier <david250@videotron.ca> - 2011-04-28 21:50 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-29 14:09 +1200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-04-28 23:01 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-29 15:09 +1200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Uno <merrilljensen@q.com> - 2011-05-08 00:34 -0700
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Marni Zollinger <marni@altgreendesigns.com> - 2011-05-10 23:38 -0600
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-04-29 07:15 +0100
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. David Bernier <david250@videotron.ca> - 2011-04-28 23:16 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-04-29 02:34 +0000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-04-29 01:04 -0600
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-04-30 20:48 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Uno <Uno@example.invalid> - 2011-05-04 19:12 -0600
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-04-29 08:13 -0700
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-04-29 17:41 +0000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-04-29 12:53 -0700
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-05-05 16:38 -0700
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-04-29 22:45 +0000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> - 2011-04-29 23:36 -0500
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-04-29 22:43 +0000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-04-29 19:43 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Thad Smith <ThadSmith@acm.org> - 2011-05-01 08:31 -0700
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-02 07:58 +1200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-05-01 20:01 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-02 12:42 +1200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-05-01 22:34 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-02 02:50 +0000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Thad Smith <ThadSmith@acm.org> - 2011-05-01 21:21 -0700
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-05-02 08:31 +0100
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-05-23 16:52 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-05-23 14:18 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-05-23 17:20 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-05-23 16:52 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-05-23 16:52 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-05-23 16:53 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> - 2011-05-23 09:16 +0200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Ilmari Karonen <usenet2@vyznev.invalid> - 2011-05-26 22:06 +0000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-06-28 17:19 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "Vinzent Hoefler" <0439279208b62c95f1880bf0f8776eeb@t-domaingrabbing.de> - 2011-06-28 10:44 +0200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-28 10:19 +0100
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> - 2011-06-28 11:14 +0200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-06-28 21:59 +1000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-28 13:16 +0100
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-06-28 11:44 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-28 08:33 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Georg Bauhaus <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> - 2011-06-28 15:53 +0200
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke@bigpond.com.au> - 2011-06-28 22:39 +0000
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-28 08:32 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-28 14:03 +0100
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-28 10:25 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-28 16:01 +0100
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-28 20:20 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-06-29 01:38 -0700
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-06-28 10:04 -0600
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-28 17:36 +0100
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-06-28 10:51 -0600
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-28 20:27 -0400
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-06-28 19:00 -0600
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-29 19:48 +0300
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-06-28 10:52 -0600
Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG. David Bernier <david250@videotron.ca> - 2011-06-28 13:06 -0400
Re: Wiki "robin" <robin51@dodo.mapson.com.au> - 2011-06-29 10:00 +1000
Re: Wiki James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-28 20:25 -0400
Re: Wiki Ivan Shmakov <ivan@gray.siamics.net> - 2011-06-29 16:03 +0700
Re: Wiki Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-30 13:39 +0100
Re: Wiki Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-01 22:15 +0100
Re: Wiki Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-06-28 18:52 -0600
Re: Wiki James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-06-29 05:52 -0400
Re: Wiki Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-06-29 10:12 -0400
Re: Wiki Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-06-29 14:29 -0600
Re: Wiki Dr Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2011-06-29 07:43 +0100
Re: Wiki Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-06-29 10:10 -0400
Re: Wiki Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-29 19:42 +0300
Re: Wiki Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> - 2011-06-29 18:09 +0100
Re: Wiki Dr Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2011-06-29 18:48 +0100
Re: Wiki Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-06-29 09:50 -0400
csiph-web