Subject: Re: bug#32605: [w64] (random) never returns negative

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2021 08:54:53 +0300

> From: Andy Moreton <[email-masked]>
> Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 22:12:29 +0100
> 
> You elided the detail of my previous message:

Because I had nothing useful to say in response.  If someone wants to
work on a better emulation of 'random' for w64, that's fine; I don't
consider myself an expert in this area, and therefore not sure I even
understand the significance of providing 31 bits of randomness from a
functions such as 'random', which AFAIR is not the standard of RNGs.
My goal was to make the current implementation better with relatively
simple and straightforward changes.  Calling rand_as183 one more time
is IMHO not a good solution; but again, I'm not an expert.

> > What about the variant below, does it produce better results?
> >
> >     int val = ((rand_as183 () << 15) | rand_as183 ());
> >   #ifdef __x86_64__
> >     return 2 * val - 0x7FFFFFFF;
> >   #else
> >     return val;
> >   #endif
> 
> Why is this any better ? On 32bit builds it does not return 31 random
> bits (only a 30bit value) and on 64bit builds the lowest bit is not
> random.

I hoped it will be better because it produced negative values as well,
not only positive values, without any performance penalty.  For a
problem that was left unsolved for 3 years it sounds good enough to
me.

So my proposal is to install the above until someone comes up with a
better solution.  But if that's unacceptable, let alone if my
participation in this discussion is an annoyance, like it seems to be,
I'll readily bow out of it.