Personally, I think both versions should be retained.  I can see uses for both
evenly distributed random placements (e.g. your code) and the original code...
nebular distribution / globular clusters would be easily generated using the
original code.

Slime wrote:

> Out of curiosity, I looked at rand.inc, and noticed a flaw in the way the
> VRand_In_Sphere macro works. It is supposed to return random values inside a
> sphere, but it has a bias that most often returns values closer to the
> center of the sphere. I have solved the problem in the below code, it merely
> involves taking the cube root of the radius (magnitude) of the vector to be
> returned.

Post a reply to this message