Talk:Linear congruential generator: Difference between revisions

Content added Content deleted

Inline

Revision as of 21:38, 22 August 2015 (view source) rosettacode>Emjay (→‎Should the vectorized variant of the X86 Assembly LCG be included?: new section) ← Older edit		Revision as of 21:58, 22 August 2015 (view source) rosettacode>Emjay (→‎Should the vectorized variant of the X86 Assembly LCG be included?) Newer edit →
Line 49:		Line 49:
	== Should the vectorized variant of the X86 Assembly LCG be included? ==		== Should the vectorized variant of the X86 Assembly LCG be included? ==

	I recently read the instructions on this page more thoroughly. I initially believed that it was only necessary to create an LCG, not to replicate an existing implementation. The example posted under "Second example using AVX instructions." does not produce identical output to the Microsoft rand(). Should this example be removed completely? For now, I will add an ~~annotation~~ to the vectorized implementation explaining that its output will differ from Microsoft rand(). [[User:Emjay\|Emjay]] ([[User talk:Emjay\|talk]]) 21:38, 22 August 2015 (UTC)		I recently read the instructions on this page more thoroughly. I initially believed that it was only necessary to create an LCG, not to replicate an existing implementation. The example posted under "Second example using AVX instructions." does not produce identical output to the Microsoft rand(). Should this example be removed completely? For now, I will add a comment to the vectorized implementation explaining that its output will differ from Microsoft rand(). [[User:Emjay\|Emjay]] ([[User talk:Emjay\|talk]]) 21:38, 22 August 2015 (UTC)