In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
James Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue 19 Feb, Justin Fletcher wrote:
> >
> > James Taylor wrote:
> > >
> > > Please look at the problem before passing comment.
> >
> > Still, it's empirical evidence; whilst it may be skewed there's
> > very little you can say from empirical evidence other than that
> > over the period... I said this.
>
> I think your condescension is rather unnecessary.
I think your belief that empirical evidence is proof is wrong; which
is what I'm stating.
> You *still* haven't run the program have you?
> Please run it, understand it, and only then make such
> comments, otherwise you run the risk of seeming foolish.
It didn't work. It's like saying that I've observed only 20 white men in the
street, therefore I assume that the world is made up of white men. Empirical
evidence, is still only empirical evidence. I've not denied that your
results appear correct, just that I can't say that they are awful or
anything else about them except that they appear to be less than ideal.
You began by talking about perl rand function then went off to talk about C
rand functions and their implication, which as I stated made little sense,
so I can only assume that you where unsure what you meant on other fronts.
I'm sure you have a much more solid foundation in statistical methods than
I, but any results that you gain from a random number function may only
indicate possible areas of concern. Your statements were making it out as if
the results were the only factors - they're not; they are indicative of an
underlying issue which has now been addressed.
> > > I'm referring to Acorn C
> >
> > Perl isn't built with Acorn C, though;
>
> I now know that UnixLib was used to the *exclusion* of the
> standard Acorn CLib. Previously I thought UnixLib would only
> be used for the things not provided by CLib which is why I
> thought it strange that rand() shouldn't work. I stand
> corrected, thank you.
Ah; right.
> > if you want to comment on the randomness of perl;
> > you will have to use UnixLib.
>
> As a user of Perl I can comment on the randomness of Perl
> regardless of whether I also happen to be a user of UnixLib.
I agree; it was just at odds with the other comments you made.
--
Gerph {djf0-.3w6e2w2.226,6q6w2q2,2.3,2m4}
URL: http://www.movspclr.co.uk/
.... Eyes to the heavens, screaming at the sky;
Trying to send you messages, but choking on goodbye.
