Re: simple PRNG?
- From: Richard Heathfield <rjh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 10:24:22 +0000
jacob navia said:
<snip>
The lcc-win compiler system uses this:
Let us not forget that the lcc-win compiler system does not conform to
ISO/IEC 9899:1999, which you have said this very morning is "standard C".
So you're advocating a non-conforming compiler system.
<snip>
This needs 32 bit maths as you see. I think it could be ported to 16
bits by making the result mod 2^16 -1
Yes, it can. Unfortunately, this gives the result 32767 on every call. Time
to break out your debugger, perhaps.
Put your own house in order before complaining about other people.
--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk>
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: simple PRNG?
- From: jacob navia
- Re: simple PRNG?
- References:
- simple PRNG?
- From: copx
- Re: simple PRNG?
- From: Morris Dovey
- Re: simple PRNG?
- From: copx
- Re: simple PRNG?
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: simple PRNG?
- From: copx
- Re: simple PRNG?
- From: jacob navia
- simple PRNG?
- Prev by Date: Re: simple PRNG?
- Next by Date: Re: simple PRNG?
- Previous by thread: Re: simple PRNG?
- Next by thread: Re: simple PRNG?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|