And when you choose multiples, you usually don't want duplicates, so what you often need is a shuffle. How do you shuffle? Well you can call sort() with some kind of customer random as-me comparator. DON'T DO THIS.
-
-
A cool, though not common any more, way to generate normally distributed numbers is called the Box-Muller transform, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Box–Muller_transform …, and it combines the "Just throw the bad crap away" (aka rejection sampling) and two-dimensional approaches we've seen already.
Show this thread -
With Box-Muller, we choose two random values, between -2^^31 and 2^^31 say, we plot them as x and y on a two dimensional plane. If (x,y) lies within the circle of radius size 2^^31, we keep the point, otherwise we go again. r is the distance from the origin to (x, y) squared.
Show this thread -
Here's a picture from Wikipedia, but basically we're throwing darts at a square and if they land in a circle we're good. It's amazing how much low-level stuff is dumb-as-rocks.pic.twitter.com/pQ97dvdD8x
Show this thread -
O.k. some parting thoughts before ending this thread. First, if you need to generate random numbers in constant time, or exotic distributions, get super deep into this stuff. There are seriously rough weeds to tackle.
Show this thread -
Second: if you find yourself building a whole RNG, it's really very hard, again, get deep in the weeds and learn about DRBGs, fork-safety, thread-safety, /dev/urandom, getrandom() and so on. Avoid if you can!
Show this thread -
Third: always use a secure RNG, your language or programming environment should have one. *Don't* ever seed an RNG yourself. One exception: for fuzz inputs and other tests, where you may want repeat deterministically for debugging. But DON'T LET IT LEAK INTO PRODUCTION.
Show this thread -
Another exception is games, where you may want to generate content and play based on a small seed value, BUT UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT SECURE.
Show this thread -
Last tip: always measure your little random functions with a histogram or whatever. I still code these wrong and have to check. Thanks for reading!
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.