From owner-freebsd-current Sun Feb 2 10:43:47 2003 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B256337B401; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 10:43:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [212.242.86.163]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9C7643F43; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 10:43:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from phk@freebsd.org) Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by critter.freebsd.dk (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h12Ihj4W031533; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 19:43:45 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from phk@freebsd.org) To: "Andrey A. Chernov" Cc: Mark Murray , Doug Barton , Kris Kennaway , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rand() is broken From: phk@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 02 Feb 2003 21:38:26 +0300." <20030202183826.GA66487@nagual.pp.ru> Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 19:43:44 +0100 Message-ID: <31532.1044211424@critter.freebsd.dk> Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In message <20030202183826.GA66487@nagual.pp.ru>, "Andrey A. Chernov" writes: >On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 19:32:50 +0100, phk@freebsd.org wrote: >> >> Anyway, last time we discussed this, I think we stuck with the rand() >> we had because we feared that people were using it's repeatable well >> documented sequence of random numbers in regression testing. > >As documented, it must be repeatable across the calls for same seed, that >is all. It not means repeatable accross platforms or across different OS >versions. In fact it is already not repeatable across different OS'es, so >regression is limited. Also, regression must not stop bugs fixing progress >in anycase. Our manual pages do not comprehensively list all compatibility concerns or concessions, waving our manpage about does not address the concern. As I said, I don't know how big a concern this is. But last time it was enough of a concern to make us keep rand() as it was. Please surf the mail-archives to find the discussion, it contained a lot of good arguments from both sides, arguments which should be thought about before changing rand(). -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message