On Thu, 14 Sep 2000 11:58:46 -0400, Mark-Jason Dominus wrote:
>If there are no objections, I will freeze this in twenty-four hours.
Oh, I have a small one: I feel that this speudo-random salt should NOT
affect the standard random generator. I'll clarify: by default, if you
feed the pseudo-random generator with a certain number, you'll get the
same sequence of output numbers, every single time. There are
applications for this. I think that any call to crypt() should NEVER
change this sequence of numbers, in particular, it should not skip a
number every time crypt() is called with one parameter.
Therefore, crypt() should have it's own pseudo-random generator. A
simple task, really: same code, but a different seed variable.
--
Bart.
