Re: [boost] random number library review

From: Beman Dawes (beman_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-06-08 07:58:36

At 11:35 PM 6/7/00 +0200, Jens Maurer wrote:

>Csaba Szepesvari wrote:
>> 3) checking conformance
>> 
>> When an rng is passed along, the client might want to have a means
for
>> checking if it received an appropriate one (appropriate
distribution).
>
>Ok.  The plan is to have an enum 
>enum random_distribution { random_uniform_int, [...] random_normal }
>and an appropriate "static const" member within each distribution.
>
>Or do we want a traits class (more extensible than a member) like
>this (similar to std::iterator_traits<>)?
>
>template<class T>
>class random_traits {
>  static const random_distribution = ...
>};

My general sense is that the random number library is already quite
feature rich, particularly from the standpoint of a casual user.  If
you try to solve all problems you will end up with something only
experts will use.  A problem presented as "the client might want..."
doesn't sound serious enough to warrant more than a very simple
change, if any change at all. 

>>   As a
>> result you can not have two linear congruential generators with
different
>> parameters in the same program 
>
>Yes, you can.  LCGs with different parameters have different types
>(note the template value parameters), thus the "static" members are
>actually disjoint.

You might want to point that out in the docs if you haven't done so
already.

Cheers,

--Beman