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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,d541063ff843658f
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Received: by 10.180.19.132 with SMTP id f4mr725205wie.2.1362276833504;
        Sat, 02 Mar 2013 18:13:53 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 bp2ni69216wib.1!nntp.google.com!feeder1.cambriumusenet.nl!feed.tweaknews.nl!194.109.133.83.MISMATCH!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed4.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!border4.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border3.nntp.ams.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsreader4.netcologne.de!news.netcologne.de!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.ecp.fr!news.in2p3.fr!in2p3.fr!not-for-mail
From: Vincent LAFAGE <lafage@ipno.in2p3.fr>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Parallel_Simulation
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:20:46 +0100
Organization: In2p3
Message-ID: <kghnob$3rp$1@ccpntc8.in2p3.fr>
References: <kgfdsp$tb0$1@ccpntc8.in2p3.fr>
 <nospam-A31E64.07402825022013@news.aioe.org> <kgg6b2$kma$1@ccpntc8.in2p3.fr>
 <973a091e-4650-41d8-bddf-f229abcb5adc@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ipnnarval.in2p3.fr
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: ccpntc8.in2p3.fr 1361863243 3961 134.158.92.7 (26 Feb 2013 07:20:43
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@cc.in2p3.fr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:20:43 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686;
 rv:10.0.12) Gecko/20130116 Icedove/10.0.12
In-Reply-To: <973a091e-4650-41d8-bddf-f229abcb5adc@googlegroups.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: 2013-02-26T08:20:46+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Le 25/02/2013 19:18, Shark8 a �crit :
> On Monday, February 25, 2013 11:17:23 AM UTC-6, Vincent LAFAGE wrote:
>>
>> Would you think of another way?
> 
> Well, you could forgo the independent RNG requirement and make a protected object that is say a stack filled with random values and is replenished as-needed.

This was indeed my first attempt. But it turned out that the workers for
the computation were not so slow (quite optimized) compared to the
generator, and would dry the RNG stack quickly. So I try to explore the
more parallel way.

> OR you could have your different RNGs nested into the task itself (say the declaration area) -- then make the seed value take values from the protected object above.

Could be another interesting try.

Thanks!