Can I use z%=RND(-1,0,1)?

Will this give me a 33.3...% chance of giving a random number?

Regards
Andy Barber
Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: +44 20 8402 3385 ~ Mobile +44 791 883 4739 ~ Fax: +44 705 069 5845
An equivalent method would be:

z% = RND(-1 to 1)

which would generate values of -1, 0, or 1, with roughly equal chances of it throwing up any of the three values. Subject to the dreaded random number generator, of course. Hope I understood what you meant, Andy.

Interestingly, as an aside, if you supply fixed RANDOMISE values beforehand, IIRC it would generate the same sequence of random numbers.

100 INPUT integer_number%
110 RANDOMISE integer_number%
120 FOR a=1 TO 9:PRINT RND(0 TO 100)

Try entering the same number several times in line 100, you will, if I am right, get the same series of 9 random numbers! Might form a kind of encryption routine where you'd have to enter the correct key (the correct parameter for RANDOMISE) to be able to decode it. Create a series of 26 "random" numbers using a given RANDOMISE value to encode the text, then that table could only be reconstructed to decode the text at the other end if you knew what value to use for the seed. There'd only be a 16-bit range of values, so encryption wouldn't be too strong, but you could have fun playing with it. Very logical things, QL "random" numbers :-)

Text encryption is of course possible by translating the text to a minority language such as Welsh to render it unreadable to the majority, although you can get web translation services for most languages nowadays, including Welsh. I'm sure I've read somewhere about the USA and allies using native American languages in WW2 to achieve the same thing, to send intelligence data, for example.

Of course, if you use RANDOMISE without a number, it creates random numbers, based on using the time value to seed the random number generator, about as random as the Sinclair random number can get.

--
Dilwyn Jones

_______________________________________________
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Reply via email to