mclow.lists added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D41316#1054968, @efriedma wrote:
> Yes, the standard says you're allowed to throw an exception from the > random_device constructor, or use a PRNG with an arbitrary seed, or even just > return zeros from operator(). But none of those behaviors are actually > useful; the code will compile, but you won't get the expected randomness. So > I prefer this solution, even if it isn't strictly standard-compliant. I'd very much prefer something standards-compliant. Repository: rCXX libc++ https://reviews.llvm.org/D41316 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
