On 6/17/2024 09:43, Jun. T wrote:
# Please do not separate a patch into [0/1] and [1/1].
# Some people reply to [0/1], others to [1/1].
What is the current status of this patch?
It's been waiting on feedback
Here are my comments:
2024/04/28 4:31, Clinton Bunch <cdb_zsh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Doc/Zsh/mod_random.yo
+item(tt(SRANDOM)) (
+A random positive 32-bit integer between 0 and 4,294,967,295.
'between 0 and 4,294,967,295'
I think $SRAND can be 0; can it be 4,294,967,295, or only to
4,294,967,295-1?
4,294,967,295 is 2**32-1 (odd number)
+item(tt(zrand_float+LPAR()RPAR())) (
+Returns a random floating point number between 0 and 1.
'between 0 and 1' Is this inclusive?
Can zrand_float() return 1?
Yes. it can return both 0 and 1. I've specified inclusive in the
documentation.
+item(tt(zrand_int)+LPAR()tt(upper), tt(lower), tt(inclusive)RPAR()) (
+Returns a random integer between tt(lower) and tt(upper). All
parameters are
+optional. If none are specified it is equivalent to
+tt(SRANDOM).
+tt(inclusive) is a flag that controls whether the result is ever
equal to
+tt(upper). By default it is not.
If 'inclusive' is 0 (off) by default, then
0 <= zrand_int() < 4,294,967,295 by default.
Is this equivalent to $SRANDOM?
In the code it calls the same function as SRANDOM when no arguments
are given.
Src/Modules/random.c
+#include <stdbool.h>
+#include <stdint.h>
I guess stdbool.h is not used?
Apparently I removed all places where I used a bool type
I think including stdint.h (new in C99 but may exist in earlier
compilers) without #ifdef HAVE_STDINT_H is OK now, since we
are now using C99 as the C language standard, right?
+/* buffer to pre-load integers for SRANDOM to lessen the context
switches */
+uint32_t rand_buff[8];
static uint32_t rand_buff[8];
+int
+boot_(Module m)
UNUSED(m)
Src/Modules/random.mdd
+load=yes
Does this module really need be autoloadable? I don't know what are
the criteria that a module should be autoloadable.
I would think we'd want at least the SRANDOM parameter autoloaded
Test/V15random.ztst
I don't know whether zsh need to check the "quality" of the random
number. I guess the simple $RANDOM would also pass these tests.
RANDOM would not pass these tests. They test the difference between
the distribution of the generated values against the ideal equal
distribution.
Maybe better to check that $SRANDOM is 'non-repeatable'?
Since SRANDOM can't be set how would you prove non-repeatable?
If we will do the quality check, then:
+ print -ru $ZTST_fd 'This test may take two seconds...'
Why two seconds? A few seconds, or something like that?
I believe that was the result of timings during testing. As I recall
the other tests were more specific than a few.
+ function calc_chi2() {
+# Calculate Chi Squared
(snip)
+ #echo
+ }
Please remove several '#echo' (for debugging?).
Yes, they were for debugging.
You can convert the functions calc_chi2(), ligf() etc. into
math-functions by using 'functions -M'. Then you can call them as,
for example (( p = 1 - ligf(s, z)/gamma(s) ))
+0q:random integer $samples samples between 1-$n
The flag 'q' works only for the lines starting with < > or ?.
$samples and $n are not expanded.
Okay explicit values used in messages.
--
Jun