On Wednesday, Wednesday 12 February 2014 at 08:01, Kurt Pattyn wrote: > On 11 Feb 2014, at 19:14, Thiago Macieira <[email protected]> wrote: > > Em ter 11 fev 2014, às 16:26:44, Tony Van Eerd escreveu: > >> http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/2013/rand-Considered-Harmful > > > > No doubt. And we should have a more secure generator, at least until we > > can rely on std::random. > > We can always 'duplicate' some code from the std::random library :-) > How 'secure' should this be? Is a Mersenne-Twister for instance 'secure' > enough?
Secure enough for a simple Monte-Carlo style simulation? Yes, definitely,
that's what it was designed for.
Secure enough for the initial WebSocket implementation in Qt 5.3? Well, not
really, but let's go with it (qrand) and fix it in 5.4.
Secure enough for cryptography? Hell no!
> > Anyone up for creating a nice function for Qt 5.4?
Ping me when the reviews are due. I'm very interested in it, but lack time for
programming it.
Konrad
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
