On Thu, Dec 20, 2001 at 03:11:54PM -0500, Jeff Trawick wrote: > But if you look at how truerand.c actually works, it is questionable > that APR should support it as-is because of its use of signals. I > don't think APR should be mucking around with signals like that.
Oh, yeah, yuck. Is the use of signal() inherent to its proper operation or can we get rid of that? Or, would it make sense to do some research into PRNGs and use that as a basis instead of truerand.c? Or, is there some worthwhile aspect of truerand.c that merits our use of it? I know that Knuth Vol. 2 has a bunch of stuff on PRNGs in concept. I don't know how current that is. Numerical Recipies in C has a chapter on randomness (Chapter 7). http://www.ulib.org/webRoot/Books/Numerical_Recipes/bookc.html Does anyone have any other C implementations (under a suitable license) that would be good to use? I'm not sure how good a PRNG we need. I'm betting there are some piss-poor /dev/random implementations out there anyway. -- justin
