Talk:221: Random Number

2013-10-28T19:55:09Z

Samiam: Diehard, Dieharder

The syntax looks like perfectly valid java to me.[[Special:Contributions/213.64.1.189|213.64.1.189]] 22:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks like Java to me too.{{unsigned ip|139.216.242.254}}
:How can Java come to mind when it is pure C syntax, which predates Java by several years and is arguably better known. A feature of most languages is that they have a "C-like syntax". See, a whole page on Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_C-based_programming_languages [[Special:Contributions/122.161.20.238|122.161.20.238]] 19:53, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
::"C-like syntax" is the best explain, this covers all. Even when I disagree that it's better known than Java these days.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:04, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
:::Just to be particularly pedantic, the double slash for the comment (which is generally utilised in object oriented C-style languages) should be avoided in C to retain backwards compatibility with C89, although it's a valid construct in C99. I'd offer, too, that the lack of library inclusion suggests this isn't necessarily Java, though it's been a couple years since I've had the opportunity to code in it. [[User:Thokling|Thokling]] ([[User talk:Thokling|talk]]) 15:35, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

As a proof of good joke, RFC 1149 was successfully implemented several times. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 08:55, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, a poor “random” function like “return 4;” would be quickly determined by statistical test tools (Diehard, Dieharder, etc.) to generate very poor random number. [[User:Samiam|Samiam]] ([[User talk:Samiam|talk]]) 19:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

Talk:221: Random Number