Hi My 2 cents: Since computers get faster and faster with time, there is a time line for more accurate techniques, even if they are more costly. So, shifting to a faster, but less accurate method now, will cause another change in the future. The only question is on the time, when computers are so fast, that hardly anyone will bother about speed of the method. Therefore, I propose to keep the current method, because it has the better long term perspective. The needs for a faster method today should be matched with an additional procedure, let's name it random_fast. Sure enough, it would the possibility to select the generator would be more elegant, for example, when calling randomize. But I would always keep the more accurate generator as the default for the reason outlined above.
Michael Schindler _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
