On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
> I prefer to use a single instance of a RandomState so that there are
> guarantees about the independence of streams generated from python random
> functions, and from my c++ code. True, there are simpler approaches - but
Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2016 06:31, "Robert Kern" wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>> >
>> > I have C++ code that tries to share the mtrand state. It unfortunately
>> > depends on the layout of RandomState
On Apr 6, 2016 06:31, "Robert Kern" wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
> >
> > I have C++ code that tries to share the mtrand state. It unfortunately
> > depends on the layout of RandomState which used to be:
> >
> > struct
Neal Becker wrote:
> Robert Kern wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>>>
>>> I have C++ code that tries to share the mtrand state. It unfortunately
>>> depends on the layout of RandomState which used to be:
>>>
>>> struct
Robert Kern wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>>
>> I have C++ code that tries to share the mtrand state. It unfortunately
>> depends on the layout of RandomState which used to be:
>>
>> struct __pyx_obj_6mtrand_RandomState {
>> PyObject_HEAD
>>
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Neal Becker wrote:
>
> I have C++ code that tries to share the mtrand state. It unfortunately
> depends on the layout of RandomState which used to be:
>
> struct __pyx_obj_6mtrand_RandomState {
> PyObject_HEAD
> rk_state *internal_state;
>
I have C++ code that tries to share the mtrand state. It unfortunately
depends on the layout of RandomState which used to be:
struct __pyx_obj_6mtrand_RandomState {
PyObject_HEAD
rk_state *internal_state;
PyObject *lock;
};
But with 1.11 it's:
struct __pyx_obj_6mtrand_RandomState {