Random algorithm

[Richard Gaskin]

Dave Cragg wrote:

> On 17 Nov 2008, at 16:04, Richard Gaskin wrote:
> 
>> Dave Cragg wrote:
>> ...
>> > The two scripts  measure the number of repeated sequences that are
>> > generated by the two methods. The first method has yet to produce a
>> > repeated sequence here.
>> ...
>> > METHOD 1 (no resetting)
>>
>> Bingo.  The psuedo-random algo used in Rev is pretty good as it is.
> 
> I'm not sure if you can safely draw that conclusion. (Although I've no  
> reason to think it isn't pretty good.)

There's the rub:  when attempting to compare anything to a truly random 
set, there's always the possibility that even repeating patterns may be 
the result of randomness too. :)

But I think we're on the same page here: short of calling some 
supercomputer over the web which uses some fancier means, monkeying with 
Rev's built-in random function may not be much better than just leaving 
it alone, which seems suitable for a great many practical applications.

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Managing Editor, revJournal
  _______________________________________________________
  Rev tips, tutorials and more: http://www.revJournal.com