On 11/19/18 6:49 PM, Robert Girault wrote: > I think I disagree with your take here. With mt19937, given ANY seed, > I can eventually predict all the sequence without having to query the > oracle any further.
Even if that's true, and I use mt19937 inside my program, you don't [usually|necessarily] have access to the raw output from it. > If you're just writing a toy software, even K&R PRNG works just fine. > If you're writing a weather simulation, I suppose you need real > random-like properties and still need your generator to be reproducible. > If you're using random Quicksort, you do need unpredictability and > reproducibility. If you're writing a crypto application, then you need > something way stronger. We need all of them ... Agreed. Mostly. IIRC, though, your question was about *replacing* mt19937, not adding a new RNG. Please use the right tool for the job at hand. > ... But mt19937 is now useful only in toy software. It has "real random-like" properties (for certain definitions of "real" and "random-like") and it's reproducible. Therefore, it's good for weather simulations, too. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
