I am also just a random guy, and I agree with much of what Brent says, but my personal opinion is that the standard library should be allowed to grow in the future to encompass areas whose generality and usefulness are comparable to those of current standard library constructs. I would consider a sufficiently well-designed suite of PRNGs to fall into this category.
I guess what I'm saying is that, after Swift 3.0 is released, someone (maybe you!) should develop an argument as to why PRNGs belong in the standard library, and pitch it to the swift-evolution list. The worst that can happen is that people (or the core team) disagrees on principle, and at least you have an answer. But if there's interest a proposal can be drafted and taken to the review stage, at which point it'll be considered and possibly accepted. Best, Austin > On Jul 2, 2016, at 11:30 PM, Brent Royal-Gordon via swift-dev > <swift-dev@swift.org> wrote: > >> On Jun 24, 2016, at 6:38 AM, James Andrews via swift-dev >> <swift-dev@swift.org> wrote: >> >> Is there a reason why random() is missing from the standard library? Is >> it just a matter of someone implementing it? > > (Note: I'm just a guy, not someone in a leadership position.) > > Random number generation is surprisingly complicated: > > * Is it a truly random number generator or a pseudorandom one? > * If it's truly random: > * Where are we getting the random data? > * Does it require platform-specific code? > * Is there I/O involved? > * If it's pseudorandom: > * What's our goal here—cryptography, statistics, both, neither? > Cryptographic PRNGs are slow for statistics, but statistical PRNGs break the > security of crypto algorithms. > * What algorithm? > * Does it use shared state, or do you initialize your own RNG instance? > * If it's shared: > * How does it behave under concurrency? > * Can you change the seed? > * If it's not shared: > * Can you seed it? > * How big is the seed? > * Where does the default seed come from? > * Can you save and restore the state? > > The Swift standard library is deep in very narrow, fundamental areas: > features requiring compiler support, control flow, basic types, fundamental > string handling, and sequences and collections. There's just barely enough > console I/O and argument support to write a very basic command-line program. > There's no file I/O, no concurrency, no networking, not even environment > variables. Those things come from Foundation or from other libraries. > > Random-number generation is another one of those things that Swift leaves to > libraries. It is complicated, platform-specific (but not generally > architecture-specific), subject to app-specific requirements, implementable > in userspace, and does not require compiler support. Ultimately, it simply > *does not need to be part of the language* in the way the things in the > standard library are. If we wanted to make a protocol for random number > generators, we would pretty much just end up with Sequence or Collection, and > we already have those sitting in the standard library. The rest is finicky > details we can leave to platform creators, library implementors, and users > while we work on the things only we can do, like improving our numeric > protocols so we can support BigInts and BigFloats. > > -- > Brent Royal-Gordon > Architechies > > _______________________________________________ > swift-dev mailing list > swift-dev@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev _______________________________________________ swift-dev mailing list swift-dev@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-dev
