Hi, David N G McCallum hat gesagt: // David N G McCallum wrote:
Maybe I'm missing something here, or it's already been said, but couldn't you just set up a really simple patch to compare the output of [random] with its previous output. If new==old then bang the random again, if new!=old then pass it through.
That's what I thought at first glance, too, but as randomness goes, it is possible, that you get a lot of equal numbers after another and that would stop your flow of numbers. Mathieu's solution is a very elegant algorithm, I didn't know before, but I'll remember that one now.
BTW (going off topic now):
I think it was a swiss scientist, who tested how "random" humans behave. He rolled a dice, and test persons were told to guess the result without seeing the dice.
The humans unintentionally tried to avoid repeating numbers. Subconsciously they must think, that "true randomness" excludes repeating results.
Of course it doesn't.
ciao
Frank Barknecht _ ______footils.org__