Sorting question
DunbarX at aol.com
DunbarX at aol.com
Thu Feb 11 10:20:02 EST 2010
Thanks for the responses, but I think there is an issue here.
I figured a sort value was assigned to each item, and certainly a larger
value of n in random(n) gives, what, more room to move?
I would expect 1000 iterations of random(3) to give an even spread of 1's,
2's and 3's. It does, of course.
Howwever, randomizing, through 1000 iterations, my three items with
random(3) yields a list heavily weighted in favor of item 1. It appears far more
often, repeatably, than it ought to. Why item 1? With random(100) the
dispersion is as expected. The value of n has to be about 15 or more to yield what
looks like a reasonable output, at least with three or four items, the only
options I tested.
I don't get why.
Craig Newman
More information about the use-livecode
mailing list