From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2bfbf78d65c8859c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: random number generation
Date: 1998/01/02
Message-ID: <dewar.883757141@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 312141835
References: <349AC365.45277E06@stud.uni-muenchen.de>
 <34AD053B.4F14233C@stud.uni-muenchen.de>
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.nyu.edu
X-Trace: news.nyu.edu 883757269 4663 (None) 128.122.140.58
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-01-02T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Mok-kong says

<<Knuth may have found that some existing methods of combinations of
PRNGs or of shuffling are poor (I haven't checked through his book),
>>


Casual conversation on the net is not a substitute for reading the literature.
If you are interested in random number generators, you most certainly need to
be fully aware of the literature. The Knuth reference is just one of many that
should be familiar to you.