commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kim van der Linde <...@kimvdlinde.com>
Subject Re: [Jakarta Commons Wiki] Updated: MathWishList
Date Thu, 02 Sep 2004 19:17:00 GMT
Phil Steitz wrote:
> That depends entirely on what you mean by "serious scientific work." 
> Different PRNGs have different properties that make them better (or 
> worse) for specific purposes. Most practical applications require 
> neither astronomical periods nor cryptographic security, so I would be 
> careful about blanket statements.

Cryptography is a whole different field and most PRNG's generally used 
in science are not fit for that. Not any of the proposed methods does 
match that criteria anyway. The fact that it is GENERALLY advised 
against usage in science does not imply that you should never use it, 
and was not meant as a blanket statement. The reason that I do not use 
it is that I an not have it when one of my larger simulation or 
randomnisation models is cracked down in a later stage as a artifact 
from the PRNG I used.

Kim
-- 
http://www.kimvdlinde.com


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message