From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7771 invoked by alias); 8 Aug 2008 12:33:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 7717 invoked by uid 22791); 8 Aug 2008 12:33:01 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.phy.duke.edu (HELO mail.phy.duke.edu) (152.3.182.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:31:46 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.phy.duke.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F0B415078C; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 08:31:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.phy.duke.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.phy.duke.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with LMTP id cp4r2MjQc0i3; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 08:31:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from lilith.rgb.private.net (unknown [152.3.113.209]) by mail.phy.duke.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36769150175; Fri, 8 Aug 2008 08:31:44 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2008 12:33:00 -0000 From: "Robert G. Brown" To: Brian Gough cc: GSL Discussion list Subject: Re: RNG question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed 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: 2008-q3/txt/msg00013.txt.bz2 On Fri, 8 Aug 2008, Brian Gough wrote: > At Sun, 3 Aug 2008 19:28:52 -0400 (EDT), > Robert G. Brown wrote: >> There are obviously several ways I can fix it so this never happens >> again, but I thought before I implemented any of them I'd ask at least >> if it is now expected that the rngs in the gsl are "frozen", or if there >> is an ongoing possibility that more will be added? > > Yes, I expect there will be some new ones (or corrections to existing > ones). > >> The other question I have is that at one point in time the maximum >> number of rngs one could have was restricted by a macro in the sources >> to be 100 (if I recall correctly -- I have a remark to that effect in my >> own code's comments). > > The macro is really an internal implementation detail and not intended > to be a limit (as far as I'm aware it's not publically accessible). > There are currently about 60 generators so if you wanted to give them > numbers 100 is too small but 1000 or 500 shouldn't be a problem. I looked over the code again and decided that was probably true on my own. I'm preparing to basically clone the types.c module but create a larger vector of types. I'll then run through a loop to populated it with the gsl ones, then add my own, in ranges. Are future/new rngs going to always be added at the end (new numbers) or will they get inserted in typed groupings? I ask because IIRC the new MT's went in next to the original MT and displaced all the numbers. This makes logical sense, but breaks code that has hard coded rng numbers. I can make dieharder work either way, but to lock in the numbers in dieharder in the latter case I have to work harder...;-). rgb -- Robert G. Brown Phone(cell): 1-919-280-8443 Duke University Physics Dept, Box 90305 Durham, N.C. 27708-0305 Web: http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb Book of Lilith Website: http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/Lilith/Lilith.php Lulu Bookstore: http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=877977