From owner-freebsd-current Sun Feb 2 12: 7: 3 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 37A5B37B401 for ; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 12:07:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from valiant.cnchost.com (valiant.concentric.net [207.155.252.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C846143F75 for ; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 12:07:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bakul@bitblocks.com) Received: from bitblocks.com (adsl-209-204-185-216.sonic.net [209.204.185.216]) by valiant.cnchost.com id PAA25355; Sun, 2 Feb 2003 15:06:56 -0500 (EST) [ConcentricHost SMTP Relay 1.15] Message-ID: <200302022006.PAA25355@valiant.cnchost.com> To: Edward Brocklesby Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: rand() is broken In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 02 Feb 2003 19:41:17 GMT." <200302021941.h12JfJ1a004169@a.smtp.serv.lythe.org.uk> Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2003 12:06:56 -0800 From: Bakul Shah 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 > Maybe I missed something, but why cannot you just rip random() from libc, > rename it to bakul_shah_random() and use that in your testing code? Then you > are safe from any changes to random(), and indeed have a portable RNG if your > host OS changes. Yes, *I* can do it but I don't work at every place they do simulation! If in the extreme you are suggesting that a portable application shouldn't rely on any OS features, you are of course right but that kind of makes mockery of any claims of compatibility. The point of compatibility is to not break interfaces unless there is a significant benefit. -- bakul To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message