On Dec 2, 5:42 am, Stuart Halloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is it big enough to matter? My intuition says "yes". That's worth > nothing, so I will write some tests when I have some spare time ... > but secretly I was hoping that this thread would goad someone else > into writing the tests and publishing their results. :-)
I've got a parallel (using Pthreads) Monte Carlo test program in C that could be easily ported. If nobody wants to do my work for me ;-P then I'll get to it as soon as I can. But I don't have PRNG quality metrics -- those are the main things we should port if we're into writing new parallel PRNGs. btw you probably don't have to implement your own from scratch -- you could just port something like SPRNG: http://sprng.fsu.edu/Version2.0/index.html I've written a little about interfaces for parallel PRNGs here: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~mhoemmen/cs194/Tutorials/prng.pdf I have the feeling that the "right interface" for a single stream of pseudorandom numbers is a seq, rather than a "function" that you call. mfh --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
