5 ms·
You're right, I shouldn't have said many. But there are RNGs which are faster, smaller, and simpler and fail fewer tests, so I don't know why MT would ever be u
by edflsafoiewq 7y ago
You're right, I shouldn't have said many. But there are RNGs which are faster, smaller, and simpler and fail fewer tests, so I don't know why MT would ever be used. It could win in period I guess, if anyone could ever use that large a period.
It is a heated debate, but it should be easier to agree that some RNG is not the best one than to agree it is.