Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #147942
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" |
| Date | 2019-11-11 13:57 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <qqcavm$8or$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <uRIwF.17878$kE3.891@fx36.iad> <bYoxF.132400$Ko9.64189@fx48.iad> <86k189ejbd.fsf@linuxsc.com> <qqbe35$lq0$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
On 11/11/19 5:44 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: ... > ... Heck, is rand() even > guaranteed to return RAND_MAX at all? ... As the standard itself notes in footnote 295: "There are no guarantees as to the quality of the random sequence produced and some implementations are known to produce sequences with distressingly non-random low-order bits. Applications with particular requirements should use a generator that is known to be sufficient for their needs." Note, in particular, that an implementation of rand() which always returned 0 would satisfy all of the standard's applicable requirements. As a practical matter, a uniform distribution over the range [0,RAND_MAX] is fairly trivial to arrange, and can reasonably be expected of any half-way serious implementation, even though the standard fails to make any such guarantee. But don't expect anything more than a uniform distribution.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Bart, a tcc "issue" DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-06 18:40 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-07 00:03 +0000
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-07 00:06 +0000
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-07 01:44 +0000
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-07 10:05 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-07 13:22 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2019-11-08 09:19 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-08 11:03 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-11-07 18:22 +0100
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Manfred <noname@add.invalid> - 2019-11-07 18:30 +0100
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-11-08 20:51 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-11-08 20:59 -0800
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-09 23:16 +0000
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-11-09 20:27 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2019-11-10 01:38 +0000
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-11-09 20:59 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2019-11-09 19:22 -0800
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-10 03:04 +0000
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2019-11-09 23:04 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-10 13:15 +0000
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-11-10 06:04 -0800
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-11-10 07:49 -0800
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-11-10 17:49 +0000
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-11-11 02:44 -0800
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-11-11 13:57 -0500
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2019-11-14 16:51 -0800
Re: Bart, a tcc "issue" Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2019-11-28 16:03 -0800
csiph-web