From: "Simon De Deyne" <sdedeyne AT online DOT be>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: how about "more" random ?
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:08:35 +0200
Organization: Customer of Online Internet
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <7np18t$nj5$1@trex.antw.online.be>
References: <7nn5h5$1v1$1 AT trex DOT antw DOT online DOT be> <7nn6iq$hl9$1 AT taliesin DOT netcom DOT net DOT uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: a04-225.antw.online.be
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Thanks for the answer! I did consider this way, but then,
i also noticed that the seeding with the time function  (srand) isn't
as random as when i used the other random function.
Would there be a way to get more random numbers anyway?

 Simon

> So to produce a random number between 0 and 99
> x = rand() % 100;
>