From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: random doesn't feel very random Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 12:42:21 +0300 Message-ID: <83ipbzqtxe.fsf@gnu.org> References: <876288yh72.fsf@kanis.fr> <87wr0livd4.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87lih0ykue.fsf@Rainer.invalid> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1346406156 9569 80.91.229.3 (31 Aug 2012 09:42:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 09:42:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Achim Gratz Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Aug 31 11:42:37 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1T7NkK-0002iM-TN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 11:42:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57072 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T7NkI-0006ry-JT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 05:42:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41990) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T7NkB-0006rY-IB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 05:42:33 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T7Nk7-0002aJ-Mx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 05:42:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:42389) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1T7Nk7-0002aD-FC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 05:42:23 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0M9M00D005KKWG00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 12:42:22 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0M9M00DGO5MLPW80@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 12:42:21 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <87lih0ykue.fsf@Rainer.invalid> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:152911 Archived-At: > From: Achim Gratz > Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 07:17:45 +0200 > > Richard Stallman writes: > > It is a feature that, if you don't call (random t), `random' returns > > a predictable sequence. That is good for debugging. > > I recognize that, but it leads directly to the mis-use of (random t) all > over the place. Wouldn't it be better (in the absence of any API > changes) to have an option to start Emacs with a predictable seed for > debugging and have it use a random seed otherwise? IMO, it would be better to fix the packages that misuse '(random t)'.