Raymond Hettinger added the comment: FWIW, the previous discussions on the MersenneTwister have all resulted in a decision to stick with it.
The PCG family of PRNG is relatively new. IIRC, the paper for it was never accepted for publication and some of its bolder claims haven't been proven. It is far being standard or widely adopted. In addition, there is not a single "the PCG RNG". Instead, it is a collection of ideas and patterns for creating RNGs without recommending a single one that the "here use this one". Tim reminded us that any issues for the MersenneTwister didn't surface for many years after its initial publication and wide-spread acceptance. That is a cautionary note for adopting something too soon. FWIW, I reviewed the PCG work a good while ago and discussed it with Guido. The decision was to stick with the current safe choice. That said, if someone wants to add this to PyPi, it is a really easy coding task. There isn't much to the PCG code and the Python random module was designed to be "pluggable" so that other RNGs can easily be substituted by user. ---------- assignee: -> rhettinger resolution: -> rejected stage: -> resolved status: open -> closed _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue30880> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
