www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | "Simon De Deyne" <sdedeyne AT online DOT be> |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | how about "more" random ? |
Date: | Thu, 29 Jul 1999 10:08:35 +0200 |
Organization: | Customer of Online Internet |
Lines: | 13 |
Message-ID: | <7np18t$nj5$1@trex.antw.online.be> |
References: | <7nn5h5$1v1$1 AT trex DOT antw DOT online DOT be> <7nn6iq$hl9$1 AT taliesin DOT netcom DOT net DOT uk> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | a04-225.antw.online.be |
X-Priority: | 3 |
X-MSMail-Priority: | Normal |
X-Newsreader: | Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2014.211 |
X-MimeOLE: | Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2014.211 |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Reply-To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
Thanks for the answer! I did consider this way, but then, i also noticed that the seeding with the time function (srand) isn't as random as when i used the other random function. Would there be a way to get more random numbers anyway? Simon > So to produce a random number between 0 and 99 > x = rand() % 100; >
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |