On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 03:18:01PM +0300, Janne Blomqvist wrote: > Hi, > > the example we provide for the usage of the random_seed intrinsic > could be better. At least one user has already been tripped over by > the fact that on some targets the first call to system_clock returns > 0, resulting in a poor seed. Below is an improved(?!) example program. > > Ok for trunk/4.8/4.7? (Changelog + patch is of course trivial once > there is agreement on the code itself) >
Looks OK to me. It should probably also be noted in the manual that one can get real poor results if one does not set all seed values. -- Steve
