Exercise 6.2 on page 83: *Write a function to generate a Double between 0 and 1 , not including 1.*

The given hint and answer indicate generating a non-negative Int and then dividing it by the one more than the maximum possible Int value. Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that since a Double is represented using 64 bits and an Int 32, that using the amount of randomness in an Int to generate a random Double will mean that the results will be unevenly distributed, perhaps with possible values of the Double never returned. Here's what I came up with: def double(rng: RNG): (Double, RNG) = { val (int1, rng2) = rng.nextInt val (int2, rng3) = rng2.nextInt val long = (int1.toLong << 32) | int2 // this is a random Long val nnLong = if (long < 0) -(long + 1) else long // non-negative random Long val rLong = -(nnLong.toDouble / Long.MinValue) // random double (rLong, rng3) } I generate two random integers, convert one to a Long and bit-shift it 32 bits to the left and then OR it with the other Int. This should give me a random Long. Then I make it non-negative, divide it by the minimum Long value, and negate that. Intuitively this seems to me that it would give a more even distribution since there are extra bits of randomness from the second Int. Is my thinking correct? Is this worse or better than the answer given in the book? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scala-functional" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scala-functional+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.