Tels wrote at Sat, 03 Aug 2002 00:25:54 +0200:
> te@null:~> perl -e 'print rand(),"\n"'
> 0.159625336368666
> te@null:~> perl -e 'print rand(),"\n"'
> 0.292230773325176
> te@null:~> perl -e 'print rand(),"\n"'
> 0.708889858870865
> te@null:~>
>
> This means perl does something like srand(rand())
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Michael G Schwern wrote:
> More chronicles of brainstorming from TPC.
>
> Last year at TPC, Hugo asked for ideas about testing the internal C
> functions of Perl. Testing perl itself is ok, but if we can test at an even
> finer grained level of the C API many bugs can be mor
More chronicles of brainstorming from TPC.
Last year at TPC, Hugo asked for ideas about testing the internal C
functions of Perl. Testing perl itself is ok, but if we can test at an even
finer grained level of the C API many bugs can be more easily caught.
Additionally the documentation will be
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On 02-Aug-02 Janek Schleicher carved into stone:
> Nicholas Clark wrote at Fri, 02 Aug 2002 11:06:47 +0200:
> Very elegant.
> I'll follow that way.
> [Allthough, I believe I'll take a syntax like
>
> use Test::ManyParams;# like srand(0)
Nicholas Clark wrote at Fri, 02 Aug 2002 11:06:47 +0200:
>> srand could be our friend.
>
> Which is how I'm doing it at work now.
> I call srand with a random number. (I'm getting mine from /dev/urandom,
> but I suspect that calling rand() and using that to prime srand will
> achieve sufficient
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Moin,
On 02-Aug-02 Nicholas Clark carved into stone:
> On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 08:16:17AM +0200, Janek Schleicher wrote:
>> Ilya Martynov wrote at Fri, 02 Aug 2002 07:42:44 +0200:
>>
>> >> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 21:52:17 +0200, Janek Schleicher
>> >> <[EM
On Fri, Aug 02, 2002 at 08:16:17AM +0200, Janek Schleicher wrote:
> Ilya Martynov wrote at Fri, 02 Aug 2002 07:42:44 +0200:
>
> >> On Wed, 31 Jul 2002 21:52:17 +0200, Janek Schleicher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>said:
> >
> > JS> [..snip..]
> >
> > JS> Thinking in general,
> > JS> there could be
