PRNG proposal

[Matthew Woehlke]

Cyrille Berger wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 December 2008, Matthew Woehlke wrote:
>> I don't think I'm following that, sorry.
> 
> The point is that trying to find charasterics on a broken algorithm is bound 
> to give uninteresting results.

...or results that demonstrate that it's broken? Anyway, point taken, I 
think we're arguing while really agreeing.

Anyway, going back to your original message, did you see problems with 
the mean in my original algorithm or not? From the tests I did, it looks 
okay. I'm wondering about that, particularly since I'm not sure how to 
read the other part of your previous comment.

Beyond that I think it's a matter of whenever you get time to do your 
own analysis on whichever of my attempts. From there, either it will 
look good and we can talk about doing a switch, or it won't and I get to 
try to tweak it some more :-).

-- 
Matthew
Please do not quote my e-mail address unobfuscated in message bodies.
-- 
このテキストを翻訳する時間の無駄だばかばかしい