clipka <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> >   As I mentioned in another post, it makes little sense to me to stop the
> > user from accessing the features of the RNG simply because someone can't
> > think of good uses for them. And I really think that going the old route
> > of "2^32 random number streams ought to be enough for anybody" is not smart
> > in the long run.

> Wasn't there *some* talk about a major rework of the SDL anyway?

> So I'd say, never mind about "huge seeds" for now, and leave that up for a
> next-generation SDL to take care of.

  No, I disagree with the idea that we should simply not support long seeds
for the simple reason that deciding on the handiest syntax is not immediately
obvious. I would certainly want access to the whole RNG even if doing so
would require writing a few more characters.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message