Hello Pádraig, On 02/09/2015 12:22 PM, Pádraig Brady wrote: <...>
No counter arguments, which is surprising.
For me, your 'openssl' trick to generate reproducible (not so) random data was good enough - perhaps if it's documented it will suffice?
Anyway personally I prefer the --random-seed option as it's neater, has less deps, and is about 10% faster even with hardware assist. As for the --random-seed interface. Should we be supplying a string rather than an int? At least we need to cater for endianness issues with an int, but a string might be easier to use.
I do like it as well, but I'm biased... If we decide to continue with '--random-seed', I can work on improved patch to implement that. Thanks, - Assaf
