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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: New IEEE Language Popularity Ratings
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 08:21:04 +0200
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID: <no6k11$er1$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <31c22983-150c-4dab-abba-588e15f75914@googlegroups.com>
 <84d258dc-b60d-4a49-9af4-27dd6f3e5f5f@googlegroups.com>
 <1703ca9a-2665-4435-9564-4abd8a77ebe9@googlegroups.com>
 <12ca4276-cd1e-49ae-b5dc-56432e721687@googlegroups.com>
 <2a3fc931-feb3-4542-a4c9-e43affa5c4f4@googlegroups.com>
 <no5ldp$pd1$1@dont-email.me>
 <6cf84976-e561-4935-b674-6c84fbc0531a@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: xelDFTENDI+dlkJFd2Ot2w.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.2.0
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:31315
Date: 2016-08-07T08:21:04+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2016-08-07 03:19, brbarkstrom@gmail.com wrote:

>> These tests, while useful, are probably badly outdated for modern algorithms on
>> 64-bit processors. More modern tests include TestU01's Crush and Big-Crush test
>> suites. The Threefry generator is said to be the fastest to pass all the
>> Big-Crush tests.
>
> The algorithms are mathematical artifacts and they have proofs related
> to loss of digital information.  Whether or not the bits in the hardware
> are 32 or 64 or 128 bits doesn't matter.  Neither does the age.  Most
> mathematical algorithms are essentially ageless.

True, but regarding pseudo-random numbers all this does not apply. These 
numbers are not random. Tests passed or not do not change this. They 
only show if a given method of generation were suitable to use the 
generated sequence for a given set of applications. Applications change 
so the tests must do.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de