Joseph Rushton Wakeling:

No, but it's planned. Jerro wrote quite a nice one in the course of his work on the Ziggurat algorithm, and I'm sure he'd be happy for me to adapt it accordingly.

Note: I meant a simple but very fast function that generates just one value in [0.0, 1.0] (not a range).

I don't object to rewriting the names if there's a valid case for it, but it does seem to me to be important to try and match as much as possible the names that are already out there in std.random.

It's the best chance to improve naming, so do not throw it away for nothing:

The idea is to minimize the amount of rewriting anyone will have to do to adapt their code,

If you want you can keep a deprecated randomShuffle alias name for some time in std.random2.

Besides, while std.random2.adaptor.randomShuffle may be the fully-qualified name, in practice, no one will write all that out, so the redundancy is less bad;

I agree. But better to improve names when you have a (the only) chance.

However, I do think that merging it into Phobos (assuming all other factors are OK) may have to be conditional on improvements in the available allocation strategies.

We will probably have the nice Andrei's allocators in Phobos, but not in a short time. So I suggest to not rely on them for std.random2.


Reply via email to