delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Sun, 1 Aug 1999 11:26:35 +0300 (IDT) |
From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
X-Sender: | eliz AT is |
To: | Clemens Valens <c DOT valens AT mindless DOT com> |
cc: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: how about "more" random ? |
In-Reply-To: | <933323259.1410@www.remarq.com> |
Message-ID: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.990801112523.20304J-100000@is> |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Fri, 30 Jul 1999, Clemens Valens wrote: > I think the difference is due to limited wordlength, which > means rounding errors and overflow. For instance, when you > multiply by 100 before deviding, you can have an overflow. In principle, yes; but not in this case. The largest value that rand() can return is approximately 2e9, and multiplying it by 100 after conversion to a double will never overflow, since even 1e308 won't overflow a double.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |