[boost] Re: Alternate random number generators

From: Paul Baxter (paje_at_[hidden])
Date: 1999-07-16 04:00:12

I certainly have references to several random number generator tests
(diehard etc)

The better generators usually have papers associated with them detailing
their performance in the various random number tests and how they compare
with the others.

I also think its worth, say in the case of Mersenne twister, to also compile
the authors original code (C code), seed the two routines the same and
observe the same random (sic) numbers from each implementation. (The code I
have is derived from a faster C implementation which was then wrapped for
C++).

Note also that several of these routines may also have some subtleties about
always using say 32 bit ints for shifts/masking etc.
Following on from the config.hpp conversations, should there be a #define
uint32 int  or equivalent non-macro?

> One thing I like to see with any random number generator is some kind
> of statement of authority.  Same for hash function generators.  What
> kind of peer review has it been through?  What references?  For hash

------------------------------------------------------------------------

eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/boost
http://www.egroups.com - Simplifying group communications