On 10/17/22 11:40, Matt Armstrong wrote:

> I like it.

Eli doesn't, so I'll drop the idea for now. I didn't realize we were 
close to releasing 29.1, and I agree with Eli that adding a make-nonce 
primitive is not something to do close to a release.


> With respect to "cryptographic purposes" how about mentioning that
> `random' itself is potentially seeded from a cryptographically weak
> source and makes no promise to use a PRNG suitable for cryptography?  If
> I'm right about those two assertions, I think they are important to
> mention.

Good point. This can be done in the documentation now: this doesn't hurt 
anything release-relevant, as it's simply documenting what we have. I 
installed the attached.