2009/4/29 Dean McNamee <[email protected]> > > This is probably what's also exposed via Math.random()? I don't know > what guarantees we want there, but there have been complaints about > JavaScript random not being strong enough. I would try to do > something a little bit fancier than LFSR. I don't know what the > proper balance is between simple and randomy, Mersenne Twister seems > to be what everyone usually uses...
IME Mersenne Twister is crap. > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Ivan Posva <[email protected]> wrote: > > In short we should have a quick non-crypto safe random number > > generator in OS::Random(). That would also solve the multi-threading > > issue because V8 is not multi-threaded. I will provide one later this > > week. > > > > Cheers, > > -Ivan > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 09:51, Dean McNamee <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We solved this for base/rand_util*, although the implementation is > >> more "secure" meaning slow. I am not sure how much of a threat is > >> with random(), because I imagine all implementations actually do hold > >> locks, but it's not specified that way... > >> > >> On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:47 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> On 2009/04/29 09:14:52, Dean McNamee wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Just to be annoying, we probably shouldn't be using random() (it's not > >>> > >>> thread > >>>> > >>>> safe, etc). > >>> > >>> Do you have a suggestion on what we should use instead? (Know of a good > >>> open source & license-compatible replacement?) > >>> > >>> > >>> http://codereview.chromium.org/100147 > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- Erik Corry, Software Engineer Google Denmark ApS. CVR nr. 28 86 69 84 c/o Philip & Partners, 7 Vognmagergade, P.O. Box 2227, DK-1018 Copenhagen K, Denmark. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ v8-dev mailing list [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
