came here to raise the same thing, it's odd that this rand was allocating. it seems a little odd to be fixing reentry in rand() and not rand_r() when rand is al

came here to raise the same thing, it's odd that this rand was allocating. it seems a little odd to be fixing reentry in rand() and not rand_r() when rand is already so bad anyway. I'm not sure what's worse between doing this reentrancy dance and dropping the taocp magic number accidentally if the static isn't seeded (as in musl). rand is bad, stop using rand was the right answer in any case.