Why not use random(3) (or are you)? Thanks.
Blake On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Juergen Sauermann < juergen.sauerm...@t-online.de> wrote: > Hi Kacper, > > thanks for reporting this. Should be improved in SVN 439. > > /// Jürgen > > > > On 08/20/2014 06:47 AM, Kacper Gutowski wrote: > >> Currently GNU APL uses LCG with modulus 2⋆64 and then reduces values >> modulo >> desired range. This, beside being slightly biased for ranges not dividing >> the modulus, yields reduced periods when range is power of two. >> >> ?10 16⍴16 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> 11 2 13 12 15 6 1 16 3 10 5 4 7 14 9 8 >> >> Doesn't look very random to me. >> >> >> -k >> >> >> > >
