Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 19:16:04 +0200 (IST) From: Eli Zaretskii X-Sender: eliz AT is To: Kbwms AT aol DOT com cc: ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se, djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: More rand() In-Reply-To: <64f4d6d8.36583cbe@aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com On Sun, 22 Nov 1998 Kbwms AT aol DOT com wrote: > Who generates this interest? We do ;-). Seriously, though: one of DJGPP's main goals is portability, mainly to Unix systems. Every Unix box I have seen has [delmnjs]rand48 family of functions in its C library. Which I believe explains why there is interest in having them, and why people ask about them from time to time. > How does one verify that the *rand48() functions work correctly? This depends on where will the code come from. If the sources are in public domain, or if a sufficiently precise description of the LCG employed by these functions is available, then we don't have to worry about performance, since the functions will behave like on other platforms. As far as I can see, the multiplier and the addend of the LCG are described by the man page, at least on the nearest Unix box I saw, so it seems like functional testing should not be a grave consideration.