On Nov 11, 2010, at 3:19 AM, Lukas Toenne wrote: > Revision: 32998 > > http://projects.blender.org/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php?view=rev&root=bf-blender&revision=32998 > Author: lukastoenne > Date: 2010-11-11 10:19:06 +0100 (Thu, 11 Nov 2010) > > Log Message: > ----------- > Replaced the use of BLI random functions in the "Random" node by a > straightforward pseudo-random number generation based on randomized arrays. > This is a thread-safe implementation (the arrays are constant), the > disadvantage is that the static arrays (one for ints, one for floats) are > rather large (65536 entries) and still have a much shorter period than "real" > RNGs. An alternative would be using a separate RNG for each thread, but that > requires passing thread info to kernel functions. >
Wouldn't having different RNG's per thread be bad for animation? You would get different results depending on the order of your "parts" rendered. Kent _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
