Author tim.peters
Recipients Serge Anuchin, mark.dickinson, pitrou, r.david.murray, rhettinger, serhiy.storchaka, skrah, steven.daprano, tim.peters, vstinner
Date 2015-07-09.23:42:22
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1436485342.81.0.84337103251.issue24567@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
> It skews the distribution a tiny little bit, ...

But it doesn't - that's the point ;-)

If double-rounding doesn't occur at all (which appears to be the case on most platforms), absolutely nothing changes (because min(int(random() * N), N-1) == int(random() * N) on such boxes).

If double-rounding does occur, double-rounding itself may change results "all over the place", and I haven't tried to analyze what effects that has on the distribution.  In the comparative handful of cases where int(random() * N) == N on such boxes, clamping that back to N-1 just yields the same result we would have gotten on a box that didn't do double-rounding.
History
Date User Action Args
2015-07-09 23:42:22tim.peterssetrecipients: + tim.peters, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, pitrou, vstinner, steven.daprano, r.david.murray, skrah, serhiy.storchaka, Serge Anuchin
2015-07-09 23:42:22tim.peterssetmessageid: <1436485342.81.0.84337103251.issue24567@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2015-07-09 23:42:22tim.peterslinkissue24567 messages
2015-07-09 23:42:22tim.peterscreate