Re: random() function documentation

>>>> How about we just say "uses a linear-feedback shift register algorithm"?
>
> I think it'd be sufficient to just say that it's a deterministic
> pseudorandom number generator. I don't see much value in documenting
> the internal algorithm used.

Hmmm… I'm not so sure. ISTM that people interested in using the random
user-facing variants (only random?) could like a pointer on the algorithm
to check for the expected quality of the produced pseudo-random stream?

See attached.

>>> Should we perhaps also add a warning that the same seed is not
>>> guaranteed to produce the same sequence across different (major?)
>>> versions?
>>
>> I wouldn't bother, on the grounds that then we'd need such disclaimers
>> in a whole lot of places. Others might see it differently though.
>
> Agreed,

Agreed.

> though I think when the release notes are written, they ought
> to warn that the sequence will change with this release.

Yes.

--
Fabien.