I'm from the "better to ask forgiveness than permission" school, so I'm rooting 
for Adam's work to catch on among browsers and ultimately reach w3c 
standardization.

Even the typed array usage is "ok" if we harmonize the tiny subset of typed 
arrays used there (no aliasing!) with 
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:binary_data -- which is 
dherman's plan.

If the crypto.getRandomValues API becomes popular and other JS embeddings than 
ones with the DOM joined at the hip want it, we can "move" (more likely, copy) 
it into a core language module spec. TC39 will be standardizing more "library 
code" over time.

I agree that Math.random is a coveted name and we shouldn't add something 
different in form but better in fit lightly.

However, Math.random is a source of bugs as Amit Klein has shown, and these 
can't all be fixed by using a better non-CS PRNG underneath Math.random and 
still decimating to an IEEE double in [0, 1]. The use-cases Klein explored need 
both a CS-PRNG and more bits, IIRC. Security experts should correct amateur-me 
if I'm mistaken.

/be
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Reply via email to