Xref:	news2.mv.net comp.os.msdos.djgpp:7317
From:	Sumo Steve<steve AT maths DOT tcd DOT ie>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: rand(), random() or libg++ Random ?
Date:	13 Aug 1996 17:15:16 +0100
Organization:	Department of Maths, TCD.
Lines:	15
Message-ID:	<4uq9mk$6g7@synge.maths.tcd.ie>
References:	<1996Aug13 DOT 140921 AT uctvms DOT uct DOT ac DOT za>
Reply-To:	steve AT maths DOT tcd DOT ie
NNTP-Posting-Host:	synge.maths.tcd.ie
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

stwand07 AT uctvms DOT uct DOT ac DOT za writes:

>Hi

>1. Is random() any better?
>2. Are the libg++ Random classes better?

>I need a normal distribution with zero mean, so 'better' refers to these
>criteria.

1.	nope AFAIK random is a macro which calls rand
2.	libg++ does contain a random normal class, and I'd imagine
	the quality is far superior than rand

	Steve

- Raw text -