Subject: Re: [boost] Boost.Uuid and header-only support
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2017-11-05 13:04:42
> James E. King, III wrote:
> > In other words, the existing implementation may be optimal using a PRNG.
> This depends on your definition of optimality. If speed is more important
> than not having UUID collisions...
... and predictability...
> ..., sure, it's optimal.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk