From: Hans-Bernhard Broeker <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Possible truncation error
Date: 3 Jul 2000 15:51:30 GMT
Organization: Aachen University of Technology (RWTH)
Lines: 18
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <8jqcq2$m2g$1@nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE>
References: <_x665.15310$Za1 DOT 242989 AT newsc DOT telia DOT net> <8jaurd$1tg$1 AT nets3 DOT rz DOT RWTH-Aachen DOT DE> <e3iplss77o2e7tof7njpnnb1eo845mdj24 AT 4ax DOT com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: acp3bf.physik.rwth-aachen.de
X-Trace: nets3.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE 962639490 22608 137.226.32.75 (3 Jul 2000 15:51:30 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT rwth-aachen DOT de
NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Jul 2000 15:51:30 GMT
Originator: broeker@
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Damian Yerrick <Bullcr_pd_yerrick AT hotmail DOT comremovebullcr_p> wrote:
> On 27 Jun 2000 19:21:17 GMT, Hans-Bernhard Broeker
> <broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de> wrote:

>>don't *ever* rely on the contents of the last (few) binary
>>digits of floating point numbers.  They're allowed to behave totally
>>unpredictably.  Don't try to understand the logic behind their
>>behaviour --- there is none.

> In that case, are they useful as extra entropy to inject into a
> pseudorandom number generator every once in a while? :-)

No. They're not a bit more reliably random than they are reliable
precise. Neither would you want the quality of your random seeds to
depend on the optimization flags used in compiling some code.
-- 
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.