Subject: Re: [boost] [random] new threefry random engine
From: Peter Dimov (lists_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-04-23 11:06:52
Thijs van den Berg wrote:
> FYI, -as a design experiment- I’m refactoring the threefry engine to see
> if John’s idea is better. Even if the RandomFunction concept never makes
> it, then it might still result in better reusable components that make it
> easier to develop additional engines based on these random functions.
A RandomFunction is basically a high-grade hash function, right? If so, it
might be worth investigating whether to switch Boost.Hash to use the
threefry random function. There are people who find it inconvenient that
hash_value( 5 ) is 5 and would rather prefer a "random" output.