Steve Schveighoffer wrote:
4. While we're at it, should uniform(a, b) generate by default something
in [a, b] or [a, b)?
[a,b)
Every other piece of range-like code is zero based, and excludes the
upper bound. This should be no different. It makes the code simpler too.
I tried both versions, and it turns out my code is almost never simpler
with open integral intervals. Most of the time I need something like:
auto x = uniform(rng, -100, 100);
auto y = uniform(rng, 0, 100);
and I need to remember to actually ask for 101 instead of 100. True,
when you want a random index in an array, open intervals are more
convenient.
One purity-based argument is that in a random number you may actually
ask for the total range:
auto big = uniform(rng, uint.max / 2, uint.max);
If the interval is open I can't generate uint.max.
Anyway, I checked the C++ API and it turns out they use closed intervals
for integers and open intervals for reals. I know there's been a lot of
expert scrutiny there, so I suppose I better copy their design.
Andrei
