diff options
| author | Kartik K. Agaram <vc@akkartik.com> | 2015-05-23 14:58:14 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Kartik K. Agaram <vc@akkartik.com> | 2015-05-23 15:00:03 -0700 |
| commit | ca1afb29c64ae81b74e13c3f613be7d3603c2d76 (patch) | |
| tree | 5f0accc682f7c7ad9edc0a357f7a8c3ddf5ef3b5 /064random.cc | |
| parent | c1041a26ad35c22578bee34d368568d6f6c5dac7 (diff) | |
| download | mu-ca1afb29c64ae81b74e13c3f613be7d3603c2d76.tar.gz | |
1441 - give up on unit tests for 'random'
I'd been hoping that I could simply pass in the previously-returned number to srand() to generate the next one in the series. But looks like rand() is more stateful than that. Another weirdness: I put in 'round' in the same layer because of the vague idea that it would help generate random integers. But that's all we get anyway.
Diffstat (limited to '064random.cc')
| -rw-r--r-- | 064random.cc | 3 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/064random.cc b/064random.cc index 98ec3156..0180dfae 100644 --- a/064random.cc +++ b/064random.cc @@ -4,8 +4,9 @@ RANDOM, Recipe_number["random"] = RANDOM; :(before "End Primitive Recipe Implementations") case RANDOM: { + // todo: limited range of numbers, might be imperfectly random + // todo: thread state in extra ingredients and results products.resize(1); - // todo: replace rand() products.at(0).push_back(rand()); break; } |