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