On Sep 5, 2013, at 7:02 AM, Alan Eliasen elia...@mindspring.com wrote:
On 09/04/2013 05:26 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
I have updated the webrev
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/7189139/
to add the two-parameter version of isProbablePrime() which was
discussed. Naturally a CCC request
On Sep 5, 2013, at 7:50 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
The change to pass in the random number generator appears fine.
There's probably no need for a strong random number generator in this
case, though.
If that is the case why not just leave the method as is and replace
SecureRandom with
On Sep 3, 2013, at 5:11 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
On Sep 3, 2013, at 5:09 PM, Doug Lea wrote:
Only adding isProbablePrime seems to be an OK conservative
move: no existing usages would be affected, but users would
need to somehow be told that they could improve performance
by changing
Hello,
I don't think the specification of the new method is acceptable in its
current form. At a minimum, some guidance should be provided on the
properties the supplied random number generator should have to work with
the primality tests that are being used. (Offhand, I don't know what
On 09/04/2013 05:26 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
I have updated the webrev
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/7189139/
to add the two-parameter version of isProbablePrime() which was
discussed. Naturally a CCC request would be needed in the event this
were to go forward.
The change to
On Sep 3, 2013, at 7:14 AM, Bradford Wetmore bradford.wetm...@oracle.com
wrote:
Bill also wrote in that email:
add the following method to BigInteger
public boolean isProbablePrime(int certainty, Random end) ,
which allows primality testing with arbitrary Random objects.
In many cases,
So it looks like there are two decisions to be made on this topic:
On Sep 3, 2013, at 1:21 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
add the following method to BigInteger
public boolean isProbablePrime(int certainty, Random end) ,
which allows primality testing with arbitrary Random objects.
In many cases,
On 09/03/2013 03:06 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
So it looks like there are two decisions to be made on this topic:
On Sep 3, 2013, at 1:21 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
add the following method to BigInteger
public boolean isProbablePrime(int certainty, Random end) ,
which allows primality testing
On Sep 3, 2013, at 4:46 PM, Doug Lea wrote:
I assume you mean to change line 898:
if (rnd == null) {
rnd = ThreadLocalRandom.current();; // was: getSecureRandom();
}
Yes.
This seems fine in terms of sufficient RNG quality and better
performance. Also in terns of
On 09/03/2013 07:52 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
On Sep 3, 2013, at 4:46 PM, Doug Lea wrote:
I assume you mean to change line 898:
if (rnd == null) {
rnd = ThreadLocalRandom.current();; // was: getSecureRandom();
}
Yes.
This seems fine in terms of sufficient RNG
Sorry, I haven't been following the Random discussions until now, I
haven't been subscribed to core-lib-dev in a while.
I was specifically asked to comment on Brian's proposed change.
Paul pointed out something Bill Pugh wrote:
Right, see here:
On Aug 26, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
As discussed in the relevant threads in the original bug report, the
actual fix should be a very accurate replacement of SR with some other
faster and reliable RNG to avoid the inherent scalability bottlenecks.
I don't
Hi Brian,
On 08/24/2013 03:39 AM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
file:///Users/bpb/Work/JSL/jdk/jdk8/tl8/jdk/7189139/index.html
would be appreciated.
I'm puzzled over this fix.
Isn't the scalability bottleneck being inherent to SecureRandom, because
it piggybacks on the system entropy pool, which
On Aug 26, 2013, at 2:19 PM, Aleksey Shipilev aleksey.shipi...@oracle.com
wrote:
Hi Brian,
On 08/24/2013 03:39 AM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
file:///Users/bpb/Work/JSL/jdk/jdk8/tl8/jdk/7189139/index.html
would be appreciated.
I'm puzzled over this fix.
Isn't the scalability
With respect to this issue
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7189139
any comments on this potential fix
file:///Users/bpb/Work/JSL/jdk/jdk8/tl8/jdk/7189139/index.html
would be appreciated.
Rudimentary testing with JMH (http://openjdk.java.net/projects/code-tools/jmh/)
did
On Aug 23, 2013, at 4:39 PM, Brian Burkhalter wrote:
With respect to this issue
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7189139
any comments on this potential fix
file:///Users/bpb/Work/JSL/jdk/jdk8/tl8/jdk/7189139/index.html
Correction to this webrev link:
On Aug 23, 2013, at 5:06 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
I would strongly recommend holding back on this change until someone familiar
with the crypto implications takes a look at it. Unfortunately neither the
random constructor nor probablePrime indicate any expectations regarding the
quality of
On Aug 23 2013, at 17:10 , Brian Burkhalter wrote:
On Aug 23, 2013, at 5:06 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
I would strongly recommend holding back on this change until someone
familiar with the crypto implications takes a look at it. Unfortunately
neither the random constructor nor
18 matches
Mail list logo
