Talk:Pseudo-random numbers/PCG32: Difference between revisions
→The Pseudocode
m (→The Pseudocode) |
|||
Line 22:
:The link mentions this code: https://github.com/imneme/pcg-c-basic/blob/master/pcg_basic.c for the algoroithm which has these side effects.
::As I expected, but is finding some badly written C code on the web, converting it without examination to something you call pseudocode the way to produce a good task. Unless you can explain why you (the C code) needs to call next_int I do not think this should be promoted from draft status. P>S> The C code does it is not a good explanation--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 12:21, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
::I've read your criticism, and note that although this is a wiki you refrain from writing the task or suggesting improvement. It would have been better if you made alterations to the pseudocode so others could judge. As for the quality of the C code, It's by the author of the algorithm with their own priorities. Your low effort criticism is viewed appropriately. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 15:48, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
:::Okay I've modified the task. I thought I had indicated the changes when I wrote '''Should not all this be replaced with satate<-((inc+seed_state)*6364136223846793005+inc ?''' above (ok a bit of finger trouble with satate). Is all this just an attempt by you to avoid answering the question I posed about the first draft '''explain why you (the C code) needs to call next_int''' ? What the author of some C codes priorities are is unknown to me, they are not my priorities and should not be RC's priorities.--[[User:Nigel Galloway|Nigel Galloway]] ([[User talk:Nigel Galloway|talk]]) 16:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
:(Ps, if this is an answer to my earlier section then it may need to be a sub-header). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 20:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
| |||