> No number is truly random. That is the nature of computers. You
> can only generate a sequence of numbers, based on a seed.
True (of course, I knew that already long ago...), but
1) You can obscure that by using time-varying seeds in order to get
seemingly random numbers
2) You can re
> Note added by joey,
> text:
> My vote: +0
> Suggestions/remarks:
> I'll take the proposal one piece at a time:
Good idea :-)
> float random() / int random(min, max):
> If I understand correctly, the only way you'll know what kind of
> return the user is expecting is by counting args. That m
At 03:47 10-09-01, Sterling Hughes wrote:
> That's your opinion. Why do we have to change it, when people have
> been using it happily for all these years.
That's not a very good reason. We'd be playing with PHP 3.0 today if that
was the guideline :)
What happened to adding a new rando
On Sun, 9 Sep 2001, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > Well, I didn't see them agree to all that, but... You also can't
> > really say rand() isn't thread safe. It is thread safe on quite a
> > few platforms,
>
> rand() isn't thread safe, but only very few platforms (i.e., Microsoft's
People interested in rand can still visit
http://www.A-Eskwadraat.nl/~jeroen/rand ,
but if you have something interesting to say you can of course also mail to
php-dev!
World Wide Web Cie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note added by jmoore:
> My vote: ±1 :)
> Suggestions/remarks:
>
> I think that P
