Jump to content
Posted Fri Jul 21, 2017 11:11 AM
Posted Fri Jul 21, 2017 11:13 AM
Edited by TheBF, Fri Jul 21, 2017 11:14 AM.
Posted Fri Jul 21, 2017 2:43 PM
I don't exactly understand what you mean.
I am not the "sharpest knife in the drawer" as we say, but if you wanted R to relate to a random number,
why would you use a function that does not have a random number in it somewhere?
(or did I miss a joke here)
Sorry, as Mizapf wrote it was kind of a joke, but I have been wondering about how to make a test for randomness too.
Posted Fri Jul 21, 2017 2:52 PM
Patterns on the screen? Maybe you can evaluate randomness with a hires pattern that should become a kind of white noise, but this is still not general enough because it just adds one dimension.
Sorry, as Mizapf wrote it was kind of a joke.
Your jokes are suitable as exam questions.
Posted Fri Jul 21, 2017 8:08 PM
I was wrong about TI Extended Basic's initial PRNG seed. I have edited my last post to correct my error.
Say it ain't so !
Posted Fri Jul 21, 2017 8:31 PM
Say it ain't so !
Sadly true. I had assumed that >83C0 was used because it is identified by TI documentation as the “random number seed”, continued changing until a program was started and is, in fact, used by several other TI languages (TI Basic, GPL, TI Forth among them) for their respective PRNGs. Of course, you know what “assume” does.
My awareness of the truth came from finally walking TI Extended Basic's GPL code for the PRNG, which Rich has posted several times. I had not tried to slog through the GPL code to date because I was so sure I would be in for a long session with GPL. It was actually not that difficult.
Posted Sat Jul 22, 2017 12:03 AM
Yea I posted GPL XB RND code to deal with protests that I did not understand how RND in XB worked.
I made a post stating how insane Texas Instruments was for putting Advanced Calculator code in RND for 49 million in better random histograms.
But consider 99% of the time people only needed 1 to 1000 at most, so 49 million is just insane overkill and detrimental to performance on games.
This combined with my pointing out in Fest West 2017 that TI made XB slow on purpose so XB could be compatible with TI Basic, can you imagine
typing in a game for TI Basic and it would not work in XB only because it was to fast? (So TI put slows into XB to make it backward Compatible.)
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users