On Tuesday, 19 February 2013 at 21:54:54 UTC, Ivan Kazmenko wrote:
monarch_dodra wrote:
void main()
{
uint[5] arr1;
arr1[].fill(rndGen);
uint[5] arr2;
arr2[].fill(rndGen);
writeln("arr1: ", arr1[]);
writeln("arr1: ", arr2[]);
}
//----
arr1: [3622200385, 2579361262, 3208046123, 1753759120,
133131992]
arr2: [3622200385, 2579361262, 3208046123, 1753759120,
133131992]
//----
Oops!
Oops indeed!
It should be noted that a common need is to have reproducible
RNG routines. For example, I was angry at Python breaking the
reproducibility of everything except the vanilla
random.random() around version 3.2. Still, as the language is
going to have random2 anyway, and reproducibility will already
suffer much from RNG becoming a reference type, it will be a
good time for some cleanup.
In theory, there should be no reproducibility breakage, as the
generators themselves will not be changed (they are _strictly_
modeled after boosts' (the ones we have anyways)). The breakage
will only occur if the PRNG was being duplicated and generating
the same sequence twice.
In this case though, one would argue it's not reproducibility
breakage, but straight up broken code being fixed...
