Dick Moores wrote: > Here are the suggestions I've received: <snipped>
> > All 3 are essentially the same, aren't they. Which makes me feel even > dumber, because I don't understand any of them. I've consulted 3 > books, and still don't understand the use of yield. Yes, they are pretty much the same. Mine is bare-bones, just doing what you specifically asked for. Danny's is a full replacement for xrange(); Andrei's is in between. Here is a good introduction to generators: http://www.python.org/doc/2.2.3/whatsnew/node5.html > I've realized now that all 3 scripts require an immense number of > calls to random() Um, yeah, more than 2**31-1, right? :-) By the way your approach to testing the 'goodness' of random() is pretty naive. For example a random() that just repeats 0...99 over and over would score very well. For large repeat counts it could even repeat the same number for a while and score well: 1111111112222222233333333 etc. You might be interested in this article and the links at the bottom: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudo-random_number_generator Kent _______________________________________________ Tutor maillist - Tutor@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor
