Author steven.daprano
Recipients mark.dickinson, mrled, rhettinger, steven.daprano
Date 2020-05-19.21:15:04
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <1589922904.58.0.990715718476.issue40682@roundup.psfhosted.org>
In-reply-to
Content
3.5 and 3.6 are now only accepting security fixes.

Only the stability of random.random is guaranteed across versions, but you are calling randrange:

https://docs.python.org/3/library/random.html#notes-on-reproducibility

So I am pretty sure that this will not be considered a bug (unless it is a design bug).

Personally I think that the lack of reproducibility of the full range of random methods is a rather large annoyance: if you care about reproducibility, including doctests, you cannot use anything in the module except random.random, but have to write your own implementation (possibly by copying and pasting).

I don't have a good solution for this though.
History
Date User Action Args
2020-05-19 21:15:04steven.dapranosetrecipients: + steven.daprano, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, mrled
2020-05-19 21:15:04steven.dapranosetmessageid: <1589922904.58.0.990715718476.issue40682@roundup.psfhosted.org>
2020-05-19 21:15:04steven.dapranolinkissue40682 messages
2020-05-19 21:15:04steven.dapranocreate