My version of Linux includes a /dev/random. Is there any way to use
this to get better random sequences. When I cat this device, it
looks like it runs out of data pretty quickly, but I bet it would
make a series of fairly random seeds...
-Alan
--- jordi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> El ds, 06 de
El ds, 06 de 12 de 2003 a las 21:06, Jonas Maebe escribió:
> As long as you use pseudo-random number generators, you will not be
> able to generate sequences that are very hard to redo. They are per
> definition easy to reproduce, even if you mix 100 different sequences.
> If you want to encryp
On 6 dec 2003, at 21:01, jordi wrote:
You mean you want to write something like the "first" random number of
100 "different sequences"?
Yes, I'd like something like this. A sequence of numbers very difficult
(imposible) to re-do.
As long as you use pseudo-random number generators, you will not be
El ds, 06 de 12 de 2003 a las 20:40, Jonas Maebe escribió:
>
> You mean you want to write something like the "first" random number of
> 100 "different sequences"?
>
Yes, I'd like something like this. A sequence of numbers very difficult
(imposible) to re-do.
Thanks, for your help.You are very
On 6 dec 2003, at 20:26, jordi wrote:
Randomize initialises the random number generator based on the current
system time. So if you call it multiple times in a short time period,
you will get a similar (or even the same) randseed.
With this, you have answered perfectly my question, to get a difere
El ds, 06 de 12 de 2003 a las 19:31, Jonas Maebe escribió:
>
> You are using random/randomize wrong here. The correct way is
>
> randomize;
> for loop := 1 to 100 do begin
>writeln (random (1000) +1);
> end;
>
I know that this is the correct way, mine was only one bad example to
re-seed.
>
On 6 dec 2003, at 19:16, jordi wrote:
Sorry, there are a few things that I don't understand... and I am not
so
good in mathematics... and I can't explain it in English quite well.
The same seed generates the same random sequence... or not?
Yes.
and why I can randomize as often as I want in the
El ds, 06 de 12 de 2003 a las 18:34, Jonas Maebe escribió:
>
> The built-in random of 1.0.x is one of the best random generators you
> can find (although it's very slow). How is it not safe? The one in
> 1.9.x is a little worse, but it's three times faster (it's the Mersenne
> twister).
>
>
jordi wrote:
Hi, I'm looking for a good random generator. Randomize and Random does
not seem safe enougth. Can someone help?
Hi Jordi, in what sense is it not safe enough? If you really need
something "safe", only a hardware solution is probably good enough.
Best regards Preben
_
On 6 dec 2003, at 18:18, jordi wrote:
Hi, I'm looking for a good random generator. Randomize and Random does
not seem safe enougth. Can someone help?
The built-in random of 1.0.x is one of the best random generators you
can find (although it's very slow). How is it not safe? The one in
1.9.x is
Hi, I'm looking for a good random generator. Randomize and Random does
not seem safe enougth. Can someone help?
Thanks.
Jordi.
(Please, use the list if you can answer, otherwise I won't receive it)
___
fpc-pascal maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ht
11 matches
Mail list logo
