On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 07:58:09PM -0500, David Mertz, Ph.D. wrote:
> You have an error in the code you posted. You never use R2 after one
> call to SystemRandom.
Ah so I do, thanks for picking that up!
James, see how *easy* it is for experts to notice bugs, at least some of
them, in a short
Thanks for posting your code, but at 178 lines (most of which are either
commented out or irrelevent to your question) its a hard slog to work out what
you're doing.
And as for the seemingly endless sequence of "Random number ... Value entered",
what did information did you think we would get
-ideas@python.org
> Subject: [Python-ideas] Re: Better (?) PRNG - follow up
>
> > I used a brute force method to check the probability. Counted the number
> > of triples in 600 random numbers 0-9, repeated that 1 times and took
> > the mean: 5.99
> > So it loo
On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 21:39, Benedict Verhegghe wrote:
>
> I used a brute force method to check the probability. Counted the number
> of triples in 600 random numbers 0-9, repeated that 1 times and took
> the mean: 5.99
> So it looks like Chris's number is more accurate.
Calling my number
] Re: Better (?) PRNG - follow up
I used a brute force method to check the probability. Counted the number
of triples in 600 random numbers 0-9, repeated that 1 times and took
the mean: 5.99
So it looks like Chris's number is more accurate.
Benedict
Op 6/12/2022 om 09:25 schreef Alex
I used a brute force method to check the probability. Counted the number
of triples in 600 random numbers 0-9, repeated that 1 times and took
the mean: 5.99
So it looks like Chris's number is more accurate.
Benedict
Op 6/12/2022 om 09:25 schreef Alex Prengère:
@Chris Indeed the true
@Chris Indeed the true figure, if my math is correct, is a bit under 5.98
because of the "non-independence" of triplets.
I computed it and found 5.382, so finding 6 is entirely normal.
For the details: calling L = 600 and n = 3
* number of possible sequence of L digits: 10^L
* if a specific digit
On 6/12/22 3:58 pm, James Johnson wrote:
I came back to this thread looking for the list of randomness tests, and
I keep missing them somehow.
If you're interested in testing a PRNG really thoroughly, check
out TestU01:
http://simul.iro.umontreal.ca/testu01/tu01.html
--
Greg
On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 14:00, James Johnson wrote:
>
> I came back to this thread looking for the list of randomness tests, and I
> keep missing them somehow.
>
> The reason for my follow up is this: The random number function in Python has
> important uses far beyond my personal concerns, and
I came back to this thread looking for the list of randomness tests, and I
keep missing them somehow.
The reason for my follow up is this: The random number function in Python
has important uses far beyond my personal concerns, and random.randint(0,9)
is supposed to be the Mersenne Twister.
I
10 matches
Mail list logo
