From owner-freebsd-hackers  Tue Oct  8 01:22:18 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA08411
          for hackers-outgoing; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 01:22:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.34.47])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA08395
          for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 01:22:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (localhost.Berkeley.EDU [127.0.0.1]) by paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.11/8.6.9) with ESMTP id BAA18793 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 01:22:09 -0700
From: Josh MacDonald <jmacd@CS.Berkeley.EDU>
Message-Id: <199610080822.BAA18793@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: I plan to change random() for -current (was Re: rand() and random()) 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 08 Oct 1996 08:14:14 +0200."
             <3071.844755254@critter.tfs.com> 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <18786.844762927.1@paris.CS.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 01:22:08 -0700
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

> But I'm also tired of Terry blowing things WAY out of proportion.
> 
> Nobody has even thought about tinkering with rand48.
> 
> Nobody needing serious random numbers uses rand().

So now that we've all agreed that serious users of random numbers don't
use the system's rand(), can we all agree that for non-serious users
who just want a little randomness for playing a game or disolving an
image could use a better rand() function so that their programs don't
suck on FreeBSD?

-josh