Mailing-List: contact dev-help@commons.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Commons Developers List" <dev@commons.apache.org>
From: Duncan Jones <duncan@wortharead.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.1 \(3251\))
Subject: Re: [LANG] [RNG] New Unicode-capable additions to RandomStringUtils
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 07:04:59 +0000
References: <41FD1D64-C265-4B74-BC33-E7A3E62E81CB@wortharead.com>
 <C57C067E-ED44-4FF3-8546-AD728A9393D6@wortharead.com>
 <CACZkXPzUTGJ1WLPo6i2zwiXQb2nOBOGq-f3rspDGmEvdHTfH1g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACZkXPzUTGJ1WLPo6i2zwiXQb2nOBOGq-f3rspDGmEvdHTfH1g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <E11A1560-1296-456B-8D47-375FDF995BA3@wortharead.com>
archived-at: Sun, 18 Dec 2016 07:05:07 -0000


> On 18 Dec 2016, at 06:55, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>=20
> I thought we were talking about deprecating any random code in favor =
of
> Commons RNG?
>=20
> Gary

I guess that depends on the scope of RNG. Our previous conversation =
about RandomUtils made sense (LANG-1299), since that was about the =
functionality offered by the generator itself.

If RNG will become a repository of things you could do with a random =
generator, rather than just implementations of the generators, then I =
agree with your suggestion. If not, then I could imagine this random =
string generation staying in Lang or perhaps moving to Text.

Duncan

>=20
> On Dec 17, 2016 10:39 PM, "Duncan Jones" <duncan@wortharead.com> =
wrote:
>=20
>> On reflection, a bad choice of subject line. The other methods are
>> Unicode-capable, but just very rooted in thinking about char data =
types.
>>=20
>>> On 18 Dec 2016, at 06:38, Duncan Jones <duncan@wortharead.com> =
wrote:
>>>=20
>>> Hi all,
>>>=20
>>> I=E2=80=99ve created a variation of RandomStringUtils.random(), =
which generates
>> the specified number of code points (rather than chars).
>>>=20
>>> Implementation can be seen here (https://gist.github.com/dmjones500/
>> da2f61a0234f428748417bf1443c0dff).
>>>=20
>>> Signature is:
>>>=20
>>> public static String randomUnicode(final int count, final int
>> minCodePoint, final int maxCodePoint,
>>>           final Set<CodePointPredicate> include, final Random =
random)
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Expected overloads:
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> public static String randomUnicode(final int count, final int
>> minCodePoint, final int maxCodePoint, final Set<CodePointPredicate> =
include)
>>> public static String randomUnicode(final int count, final int
>> minCodePoint, final int maxCodePoint)
>>> public static String randomUnicode(final int count)
>>>=20
>>> And possibly:
>>>=20
>>> public static String randomNumberUnicode(final int count)
>>> public static String randomAlphabeticUnicode(final int count)
>>> public static String randomAlphanumericUnicode(final int count)
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> Any complaints if I add this to the code base? I=E2=80=99ve possibly
>> overcomplicated the predicate stuff, however it seemed the most =
flexible
>> way to specify requirements on the letters. I=E2=80=99ve created two =
built-in
>> predicates, but more could be supported (and users can create their =
own).
>>>=20
>>> Duncan
>>=20
>>=20
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>=20
>>=20


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