Thread: Randomizing

>>Why doesn't the standard require everyone to use one algorithm that is determined the best?
The standard doesn't require certain algorithms so that the compiler can use an algorithm that works best for the hardware. Speed is good, so the C++ standard is intentionally vague when it comes to stuff like that.

>> I always thought the point of having a standard was to make things standard.
Using the modulus or division to get a range from rand() has nothing to do with the standard, its a technique, not a language feature. :-)

Originally posted by Cela
>> I always thought the point of having a standard was to make things standard.
Using the modulus or division to get a range from rand() has nothing to do with the standard, its a technique, not a language feature. :-)

Why doesn't the standard library have a function that will return a random number within certain limits? That would solve this problem, wouldn't it? Something like:

Code:

int spiffy_rand(int low, int high);

Okay, maybe that identifier could use some work, but I think you get the idea.

>>Why doesn't the standard library have a function that will return a random number within certain limits?
They have their reasons I guess, but it could be that it's simple enough to write one. And if you really need it, you probably know enough to write a good one. :-)

Thanks Cela for all of your help. Sorry if my posts were annoying. I'm just trying to learn more. Once again, thanks