Originally Posted by
matsp
You do realize, I take it, that there are literally dozens of PhD disertations and other scientific documents produced on the subject of "how to produce good and/or fast pseudo-random numbers", and new ones coming out every year. But the conclusion of most of these is that it's not trivial to come up with a GOOD and SMALL random number generator. The MT is a pretty decent compromise, as far as I'm aware.
And I think we can agree that combining two PRNG together will not lead to better results than the standalone best of the two.
--
Mats