From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
To: Andy Moreton <andrewjmoreton@gmail.com>
Cc: 32605@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#32605: [w64] (random) never returns negative
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 08:54:53 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <83sfzcbmfm.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <861r6xoxqa.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Andy Moreton on Fri, 13 Aug 2021 22:12:29 +0100)
> From: Andy Moreton <andrewjmoreton@gmail.com>
> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 22:12:29 +0100
>
> You elided the detail of my previous message:
Because I had nothing useful to say in response. If someone wants to
work on a better emulation of 'random' for w64, that's fine; I don't
consider myself an expert in this area, and therefore not sure I even
understand the significance of providing 31 bits of randomness from a
functions such as 'random', which AFAIR is not the standard of RNGs.
My goal was to make the current implementation better with relatively
simple and straightforward changes. Calling rand_as183 one more time
is IMHO not a good solution; but again, I'm not an expert.
> > What about the variant below, does it produce better results?
> >
> > int val = ((rand_as183 () << 15) | rand_as183 ());
> > #ifdef __x86_64__
> > return 2 * val - 0x7FFFFFFF;
> > #else
> > return val;
> > #endif
>
> Why is this any better ? On 32bit builds it does not return 31 random
> bits (only a 30bit value) and on 64bit builds the lowest bit is not
> random.
I hoped it will be better because it produced negative values as well,
not only positive values, without any performance penalty. For a
problem that was left unsolved for 3 years it sounds good enough to
me.
So my proposal is to install the above until someone comes up with a
better solution. But if that's unacceptable, let alone if my
participation in this discussion is an annoyance, like it seems to be,
I'll readily bow out of it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-14 5:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-01 17:18 bug#32605: 26.1; (random) never returns negative Francis Wright
2018-09-01 17:34 ` Stephen Berman
2018-09-04 22:27 ` Noam Postavsky
2018-09-05 13:20 ` Andy Moreton
2021-08-12 13:17 ` bug#32605: [w64] " Lars Ingebrigtsen
2021-08-12 13:42 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-08-12 20:34 ` Andy Moreton
2021-08-13 6:29 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-08-13 21:12 ` Andy Moreton
2021-08-14 5:54 ` Eli Zaretskii [this message]
2021-08-14 8:31 ` Andy Moreton
2021-08-14 8:57 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-08-14 11:06 ` Andy Moreton
2021-08-14 11:33 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-08-14 12:10 ` Andy Moreton
2021-08-14 12:36 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-08-14 13:40 ` Andy Moreton
2021-08-14 14:43 ` Eli Zaretskii
2021-08-14 18:47 ` Andy Moreton
2021-08-15 6:07 ` Eli Zaretskii
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=83sfzcbmfm.fsf@gnu.org \
--to=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=32605@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=andrewjmoreton@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.