On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Alan Isaac <alan.is...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Behavior of random integer generation: > Python randint [a,b] > MATLAB randi [a,b] > Mma RandomInteger [a,b] > haskell randomR [a,b] > GAUSS rndi [a,b] > Maple rand [a,b] > > In short, NumPy's `randint` is non-standard (and, > I would add, non-intuitive). Presumably was due > due to relying on a float draw from [0,1) along > with the use of floor.
No, never was. It is implemented so because Python uses semi-open integer intervals by preference because it plays most nicely with 0-based indexing. Not sure about all of those systems, but some at least are 1-based indexing, so closed intervals do make sense. The Python stdlib's random.randint() closed interval is considered a mistake by python-dev leading to the implementation and preference for random.randrange() instead. > The divergence in behavior between the (later) Python > function of the same name is particularly unfortunate. Indeed, but unfortunately, this mistake dates way back to Numeric times, and easing the migration to numpy was a priority in the heady days of numpy 1.0. > So I suggest further work on this function is > not called for, and use of `random_integers` > should be encouraged. Probably NumPy's `randint` > should be deprecated. Not while I'm here. Instead, `random_integers()` is discouraged and perhaps might eventually be deprecated. -- Robert Kern
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
