Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 11:07:51 -0800 From: Bakul Shah <bakul@bitblocks.com> To: phk@FreeBSD.ORG Cc: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru>, Mark Murray <mark@grondar.org>, Doug Barton <DougB@FreeBSD.ORG>, Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rand() is broken Message-ID: <200302021907.OAA04015@agamemnon.cnchost.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 02 Feb 2003 19:43:44 %2B0100." <31532.1044211424@critter.freebsd.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> 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. [I know you are talking about rand() but Mark Murray's earlier email about wanting to re-implement random() really concerned me so I want to make sure my point gets across] Not changing random() was of real concern to me when I was doing chip simulations. ASIC design verification folks won't be happy if the rug is pulled out from under them. In general crypto and simulation needs are different and I don't trust the crypto guys to look out for the simulation guys! I don't care any more if rand() is changed but _please_ leave random() alone! And it would be nice to indicate *why* in the source code for the next time this discussion comes up. Thanks! -- bakul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200302021907.OAA04015>