dl at cs.oswego.edu
Mon Jul 15 15:27:02 UTC 2013
On 07/15/13 00:24, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> I was sad when ThreadLocalRandom reused the lousy pseudorandom implementation
> from Random. I continue to think we can do better.
Yes, I'm working on it.
> It would be nice if we could guarantee a minimum period of 2^64.
OK. I cannot think of any reason not to. Unless anyone else
can, I'll add this.
> Doug, you say "SplittableRandoms will tend to be short-lived." but I'm not sure
I meant "short-lived in the contexts that would otherwise lead to
memory placement issues." In other words, we hope people still use TLR,
not a thread-localized SplittableRandom, in these cases.
> Random provides the useful "nextBoolean" and I think SplittableRandom should too.
It's partway down the slippery slope of also supporting
the other java.util.Random methods we have no intention
of supporting, but I cannot see the harm.
More information about the core-libs-dev