In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Andrey A. Chernov" writes: >On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 17:30:48 +0000, Mark Murray wrote: >> >> Why not? Arc4 is a) deterministic and b) good for all bits. > >If you mean arc4random() function - not, because it use true randomness, >if you mean RC4 algorithm, probably yes, but we should compare its >distribution with our current variant and be sure that speed is >acceptable. What form RC4 distribution have?
RC4 can be implemented in about 4 lines of C. Anyway, last time we discussed this, I think we stuck with the rand() we had because we feared that people were using it's repeatable well documented sequence of random numbers in regression testing. This is still a valid concern, but I don't know how significant a concern it is. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
