From: Kbwms AT aol DOT com
Message-ID: <64f4d6d8.36583cbe@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 11:33:02 EST
To: ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se, Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: More rand()
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 16-bit for Windows sub 38
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Dear Eli Zaretskii,

On 11-22-98 at 09:50:35 EST you wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, 21 Nov 1998, Martin Str|mberg wrote:
>
> > While we are discussing rand(), may I ask if there's any interest in
> > adding the slew of *rand48() functions?
>
> I think there is enough interest.  Over the years, I have seen question
> about these functions posted to c.o.m.d.  So I think addition of these
> should be welcome.
>

Who generates this interest?  How does one verify that the *rand48()
functions work correctly?  On what platforms would these functions
perform?

While on the subject, Pierre L'Ecuyer (University of Montreal) has
written a generator that is a combination of four generators (with
a period of about 2^121) and has up to 100 "virtual" generators.
Each virtual generator produces an independent set of random numbers.
If there is any interest, I will prepare the functions for DJGPP.


K.B. Williams