Difference between revisions of "Talk:Pseudo-random Number Generator"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(is using XOR instead of one * or one + a good idea?) |
(unsigned comment) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
: I like to try to keep the code human-readable at first, but I'll add this as the optimized version. Thanks --[[User:Xaviar Czervik|Xaviar Czervik]] 09:55, 26 November 2007 (PST) | : I like to try to keep the code human-readable at first, but I'll add this as the optimized version. Thanks --[[User:Xaviar Czervik|Xaviar Czervik]] 09:55, 26 November 2007 (PST) | ||
If we use 2 seeds, could we XOR "^" the seeds after modifiing the seeds, instead of "+" or "*"? to make it faster? | If we use 2 seeds, could we XOR "^" the seeds after modifiing the seeds, instead of "+" or "*"? to make it faster? <small>{{#if:Ollj Oh|—The preceding unsigned comment was added{{#if:{{{2|}}}| on {{{2}}}|}} by [[User:Ollj Oh|Ollj Oh]]|<strong style="color:red;">NO USER PROVIDED</strong>}}</small> | ||
Revision as of 08:57, 11 February 2008
rand can be optimized to and will be mono safe as...
integer rand(integer spread) {
seed2 = (seed2 * seed2Mod + 0xB);
return (seed1Mod = ((seed1 = (seed1 * (seed2Mod = seed1Mod) + 0xB)) * seed2)) % spread;
}
-- Strife Onizuka 11:25, 21 November 2007 (PST)
- I like to try to keep the code human-readable at first, but I'll add this as the optimized version. Thanks --Xaviar Czervik 09:55, 26 November 2007 (PST)
If we use 2 seeds, could we XOR "^" the seeds after modifiing the seeds, instead of "+" or "*"? to make it faster? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ollj Oh