Slime <fak### [at] emailaddress> wrote:
> > 1) Simply don't support seeds larger than 32-bit. This would work, but 
> > would
> >   be a bit of a bummer because the capabilities of higher-quality RNGs
> >   wouldn't be fully utilized.

> I would go with this, because it's easy for the user.

  I'm not sure if you got the idea, but the addition of new RNGs with
larger seeds would *not* change the current usage of RNGs in any way.
You could still use the current RNG in the *exact* same way as currently.

  If you don't care about which RNG is used or how large the seeds are,
then you can simply ignore the extra stuff and use seed() and rand()
exactly like now.

  I really don't see how limiting the seeding is "easy for the user".

> In my life, I will 
> never see more than 2^32 images, so that many different random number 
> streams aren't necessary.

  How many of the features supported by POV-Ray have you ever used in your
life? Would you like those features you haven't used to be removed because
you have never used them?

  Does it bother you that POV-Ray supports more features than what you use?
If not, then why would it bother you if POV-Ray supported long seeds,
especially if you don't even have to know how they are specified and you
can still use seed() and rand() like currently?

  Can you agree that *some* people might find useful uses for longer seeds
even if you don't, exactly in the same way as some people find useful uses
for other POV-Ray features that you have never used?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message