<quote name="Andrew Jorgensen" date="Fri, 13 Jun 2008 at 11:43 -0600"> > On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 11:29 -0600, Scott Edwards wrote: > > I'm with Von. If it's random, it's not suppose to be predictable. > > After the first result, the remaining results become more predictable. > > Unless there are as many prizes as participants it's still random, and > if there are as many prizes as participants the it's random until the > last one at which point it was obvious who won anyway.
This is called shuffle. You take all the participants, shuffle them up, and start popping them off, as such a much more efficient implementation would be to treat it as such, randomize a list, and step through it. Von Fugal
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
/* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
