The RFCs are in limbo, but we are currently thinking of including the following RNGs in the proposal
- XorShift128Plus - MT19937 (for compatibility) - MT19937_64 (for more entropy and wider range) While it is clear that MT19937 is simply MersenneTwister, it is not accurate since there is MT19937_64. Also, currently, the constant name that can be passed to mt_srand() is MT_RAND_MT19937, so I think it is consistent to use MT19937. If you mean that it should be MT19937 instead of MT19937_32, then I think you are right. Please let me know your opinion. 2021年10月7日(木) 21:56 Kamil Tekiela <tekiela...@gmail.com>: > Please don't add more answers to the class name. There is already going to > be a backlash if we name it "MT19973" instead of "MersenneTwister" >
