Message108310
'Random', without qualification, is commonly taken to mean 'with uniform distribution'. Otherwise it has no specific meaning and could well be a synonym for 'arbitrary' or 'haphazard'.
The behavior reported is buggy and in my opinion should be fixed if possible. I have done simulation research in the past and do not consider them minor. If I had results that depended on these functions, I might want to rerun with the fixed versions to make sure the end results were not affected. I would certainly want the fixed behavior for any future work.
I do not see any promise of reproducibility of sequences from version to version. I do not really see the point as one can rerun with the old Python version or copy the older random.py.
The old versions could be kept with with an 'old_' prefix and documented in a separate subsection that starts with "Do not use these buggy old versions of x and y in new code. They are only present for those who want to reproduce old sequences." But I wonder how many people would use them. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2010-06-21 19:55:50 | terry.reedy | set | recipients:
+ terry.reedy, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, belopolsky, vstinner |
2010-06-21 19:55:50 | terry.reedy | set | messageid: <1277150150.62.0.715173651422.issue9025@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
2010-06-21 19:55:48 | terry.reedy | link | issue9025 messages |
2010-06-21 19:55:48 | terry.reedy | create | |
|