Hi Mark, On Monday 31 March, 2014 at 11:15 am, Mark Lentczner wrote: > On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 10:32 AM, Nick Smallbone <nic...@chalmers.se> wrote: > > One complication is that we switched to a different random number > > generator because of some flaws with the one in System.Random. > > So we would also need to pull in the tf-random package > > (http://hackage.haskell.org/package/tf-random-0.4). > > > This is unfortunate. That package doesn't look like a likely candidate for > the platform: It is new, and the API looks like it has been in rapid, > non-stable development for the last month.
Yes, I understand this objection. Then perhaps we should hold back on it for now and see how we stand the next time around. > Is is possible that you can make QC work with standard random package, and > only use tf-random as an option? Is there something seriously flawed in > random that should be fixed there? I would rather not switch back to StdGen. We have stumbled into situations in the past where we can't falsify a property just because StdGen can't come up with the right random values - while (thankfully) extremely rare, it makes me uncomfortable that it happens at all. This mostly happens when generating random functions. Nick _______________________________________________ Haskell-platform mailing list Haskell-platform@projects.haskell.org http://projects.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-platform
