Re: Generating normally distributed randoms in CL

"Madhu" == Madhu <enometh@xxxxxxxx> writes:

Madhu> I suggest that there is another reason to use a well known
Madhu> implementation.

Madhu> For serious simulations you want to publish repeatable results,
Madhu> _independent_ of the Common Lisp implementation you use---In that case
Madhu> your simulation program cannot depend on a package which calls CL:RANDOM
Madhu> [as different implementations will produce different sequences of
Madhu> numbers]. It is preferable to use FFI to a "Standard" C implementation,
Madhu> like the "RANLIB.C" package from NETLIB,

I would suggest that if your simulation results depended on the
sequence of random numbers, then your simulation is broken. Well,
assuming that the simulation wasn't about the rng, and assuming the
random number generator itself is not broken. :-)

Ray
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Generating normally distributed randoms in CL
    ... | Madhu> implementation. ... | Madhu> that case your simulation program cannot depend on a package ... If you switch lisp implementation you get a different number from your ... program because you are switching the rng. ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: Generating normally distributed randoms in CL
    ... Madhu> | Madhu> I suggest that there is another reason to use a well known ... Madhu> | Madhu> that case your simulation program cannot depend on a package ... Madhu> (after seeding the rng identically) on different runs of the ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)