Subject: [boost] [random] normal_distribution
From: Neal Becker (ndbecker2_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-19 12:01:36
The method we're using is less stable and less computationally efficient
than the method presented there. Is this true?
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk