From: Myknees AT aol DOT com
Message-ID: <c8942003.34d4c2d6@aol.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 1998 13:45:40 EST
To: eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Cc: dj AT delorie DOT com, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Documentation [was Re: Random implementation]
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

In a message dated 98-02-01 12:49:29 EST, eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il writes:

> Subj:	 Re: Documentation [was Re: Random implementation]
>  Date:	98-02-01 12:49:29 EST
>  From:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il (Eli Zaretskii)
>  To:	Myknees AT aol DOT com
>  CC:	dj AT delorie DOT com, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
>  
>  
>  On Thu, 29 Jan 1998 Myknees AT aol DOT com wrote:
>  
>  > > This function must be seeded before first calling it, e.g. by using
>  > > the function srand().
>  
>  This is incorrect.  `rand' will work okay with no seed at all (it has
>  its default seed).  You only need to call `srand' in two types of
>  cases:
>  
>       - if you want the pseudo-random sequence to be different each
>         time you run the program;
>  
>       - if you want to continue the sequence from the same place you
>         ended it on some previous run.

Oh boy, and I just sent out the new diffs.  How would it be if I include this
fact in the diffs, stating that seeding the function is necessary in the two
cases mentioned above.  That seems like it would be helpful.

--Ed (Myknees)