Hi,
It appears[1] as though OpenBSD has changed srand and rand which we use
in CMake for string(RANDOM) and with the change, RANDOM_SEED will be a
no-op there.
Do we want to use rand_deterministic and srand_determinitic or does it
not matter?
--Ben
[1]http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=141807513
Am 10.12.2014 15:38, schrieb Ben Boeckel:
Hi,
It appears[1] as though OpenBSD has changed srand and rand which we use
in CMake for string(RANDOM) and with the change, RANDOM_SEED will be a
no-op there.
Do we want to use rand_deterministic and srand_determinitic or does it
not matter?
From wha
Yes, setting an explicit seed should make subsequent calls to random
be deterministic...
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> Am 10.12.2014 15:38, schrieb Ben Boeckel:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It appears[1] as though OpenBSD has changed srand and rand which we use
>> in CMake for stri
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 14:41:36 -0500, David Cole via cmake-developers wrote:
> Yes, setting an explicit seed should make subsequent calls to random
> be deterministic...
Well, *we* want that, but I don't think that OpenBSD is making an
*awful* decision here.
Even if you want deterministic, you'
The utility of the determinism is all about enabling test suites to
pass even if they use "random" behavior. How the determinism is
achieved, I don't really care.
As long as tests that use "random" behavior have predictable results.
It doesn't matter to me if they have platform differences. As lo
Am Samstag, 13. Dezember 2014, 13:05:00 schrieben Sie:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 14:41:36 -0500, David Cole via cmake-developers
wrote:
> > Yes, setting an explicit seed should make subsequent calls to random
> > be deterministic...
>
> Well, *we* want that, but I don't think that OpenBSD is maki
Sounds to me like the perfect thing to just ignore till the dust settles.
And then, after that, if there's no srand/rand on OpenBSD... Well...
There will be, won't there?
On Sunday, December 14, 2014, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> Am Samstag, 13. Dezember 2014, 13:05:00 schrieben Sie:
> > On Thu,
David Cole wrote:
> Sounds to me like the perfect thing to just ignore till the dust settles.
Yes, this will probably take a while until this shows up in a release version
of OpenBSD. But if this is not reverted then it will probably be a good idea
to have check for this in 3.2 ready so it will
On 12/14/2014 08:36 AM, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> The idea behind this API in OpenBSD is: if you are looking for the pseudo
> numbers you need to call srand_deterministic(), i.e. you must explicitely
> state that you want the not really random random numbers. Everyone else will
> get real random.
Brad King wrote:
> On 12/14/2014 08:36 AM, Rolf Eike Beer wrote:
> > The idea behind this API in OpenBSD is: if you are looking for the pseudo
> > numbers you need to call srand_deterministic(), i.e. you must explicitely
> > state that you want the not really random random numbers. Everyone else
>
Looking at our own internal test suite usage of RANDOM_SEED leads to
the conclusion that we do not verify the sequences produced when
actually using RANDOM_SEED..
So, from our point of view, we don't really care about what effect
RANDOM_SEED has for our test suite. But I think we do still care
11 matches
Mail list logo
