Re: TIFU by using Math.random()

2015-12-02 Thread Jan de Mooij
On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 7:59 PM, Chris Peterson wrote: > On 11/25/15 5:51 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote: > >> After reading this article as well as some introduction from the >> wikipedia, it seems to me that "xorshift+" is probably the best >> algorithm to adopt, because it is

Re: TIFU by using Math.random()

2015-11-25 Thread Boris Zbarsky
On 11/25/15 9:59 AM, Mike Hoye wrote: Doing the wrong thing really fast is not hard. You have now discovered the key optimization secret of web browsers. -Boris ___ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org

Re: TIFU by using Math.random()

2015-11-25 Thread Chris Peterson
On 11/25/15 5:51 AM, Xidorn Quan wrote: According to the article, SpiderMonkey's PRNG is not much better than V8's. It seems we are using a even older algorithm, although ironically have a better result. After reading this article as well as some introduction from the wikipedia, it seems to me

Re: TIFU by using Math.random()

2015-11-25 Thread Mike Hoye
On 2015-11-25 9:33 AM, Frederik Braun wrote: On 25.11.2015 12:42, Philip Chee wrote: Hopefully Spidermonkey's Math.random() is better. Phil There have been multiple insightful responses on HN and reddit/netsec.

Re: TIFU by using Math.random()

2015-11-25 Thread Xidorn Quan
According to the article, SpiderMonkey's PRNG is not much better than V8's. It seems we are using a even older algorithm, although ironically have a better result. After reading this article as well as some introduction from the wikipedia, it seems to me that "xorshift+" is probably the best

Re: TIFU by using Math.random()

2015-11-25 Thread Frederik Braun
On 25.11.2015 12:42, Philip Chee wrote: > > > Hopefully Spidermonkey's Math.random() is better. > > Phil > There have been multiple insightful responses on HN and reddit/netsec. The short version is, that