Difference between revisions of "Talk:LlFrand"
m (→Unreferenced?) |
Iain Maltz (talk | contribs) ("more" random?) |
||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
The issue has already been corrected in the code, unit tested, through QA, and awaiting the next rolling update. [[User:Phoenix Linden|Phoenix Linden]] 08:47, 2 February 2007 (PST) | The issue has already been corrected in the code, unit tested, through QA, and awaiting the next rolling update. [[User:Phoenix Linden|Phoenix Linden]] 08:47, 2 February 2007 (PST) | ||
== More Random == | |||
How is this any more random? It just substitutes one predetermined sequence of numbers with another... [[User:Iain Maltz|Iain Maltz]] | |||
== Unclear note == | == Unclear note == |
Revision as of 21:43, 17 February 2012
Known Issues
1.13.3 specifying mag < 0 always returns 0.
- ummm thats not good. I was rather fond of the old method. Why not use the copysign function found in "math.h" after stripping the sign to put it back on? (C99 revisions of glibc will support it aka, won't be in windows but will be in any recent version of linux GCC). Something like:
include <math.h> float llFrand(float range) { return copysign(new_method(fabsf(range), range); }
- QED Strife Onizuka 18:45, 31 January 2007 (PST)
The issue has already been corrected in the code, unit tested, through QA, and awaiting the next rolling update. Phoenix Linden 08:47, 2 February 2007 (PST)
More Random
How is this any more random? It just substitutes one predetermined sequence of numbers with another... Iain Maltz
Unclear note
What does mean "the process" in "The sequence of random numbers are shared across the entire process" in Notes. Should one expect it is SIM, object or script "wide" ?—The preceding unsigned comment was added on 18:38, 22 September 2008 by Scarabeus Kurka
Unreferenced?
it's very odd to see the unreferenced template used in a wiki this way... I get why it was put there but there's no reference for internal working of the simulators so it's really out of place... add the fact that it's trying to link to wikipedia and well... can we either fix the template or just note the contentious point (I agree, there's plenty of question just how random [or not] the native function is)?
-- Void (talk|contribs) 19:14, 11 July 2011 (PDT)
- Well it certainly doesn't make any sense. That's not how entropy works! Adeon Writer 16:14, 17 November 2011 (PST)