From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 17572 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2011 19:48:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 17539 invoked by uid 22791); 7 Jan 2011 19:48:01 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (HELO fencepost.gnu.org) (140.186.70.10) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:47:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54853 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PbIHs-0008Av-Ua; Fri, 07 Jan 2011 14:47:48 -0500 Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:48:00 -0000 Message-ID: <43r5cojy1y.wl%bjg@gnu.org> From: Brian Gough To: "Robert G. Brown" Cc: GSL Discussion list Subject: Re: Three random number generators... In-Reply-To: References: User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.6 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/23.2 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Mailing-List: contact gsl-discuss-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gsl-discuss-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2011-q1/txt/msg00003.txt.bz2 At Fri, 7 Jan 2011 13:47:41 -0500 (EST), Robert G. Brown wrote: > > I have three random number generators that I think ought to go into the > GSL. One is AES -- which is pretty self explanatory -- fairly fast, > cryptographic strength. > ... > Basically, I'm suggesting that it is time to update the random number > generators in the GSL to make them more consistent with state of the art > in speed and tested randomness. Thanks for that, I am happy to add the AES and KISS (or an enhanced version of it). Instead of seeding with mt19937, I think it would be preferable to generate the seeds inline and have the generator standalone if possible. Maybe the 69069 LCG used elsewhere would be sufficient(?), otherwise a strong hash function.