Comments in MATH-1154 (bad performance in test code) and the now-reopened MATH-1124 (slow initialization) point to the need to fix the problem we created when we moved sample() to the distribution classes with PRNG provided by a final field with default implementation initialized by the constructor. Several suggestions have been made to improve things.
0) require that sample() take a RandomGenerator as an additional parameter 1) improve initialization performance of the default RandomGenerator 2) Replace the default with a generator with negligible initialization latency 3) Make either PRNG initialization or initialization of the RandomGenerator field lazy I may have missed some. One thing to note is that the (default) Well generators are *not* threadsafe, so having things final, avoiding lazy init is not really buying us anything in the current setup. So unless 2) is done with a threadsafe generator, only 0) really makes sample() threadsafe (assuming the caller protects the instance that needs to be re-supplied on each call). I am +0 for adding a new method that takes a generator as an additional actual parameter, but as a user I like the convenience of just calling sample(). I never use distributions as singletons, so the lack of threadsafety does not concern me. It seems then that a reasonable approach might be to add the new method, keep the old one but move to lazy initialization with documentation that when you use the default, the provided PRNG it is not threadsafe. I would also obviously be in favor or anything we can do in 1). Phil --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
