<putting on my “I dealt with real cryptography (not weird ‘currency’ nonsense), and had to deal with non-expert code” hat :D >

In fairness this approach is also biased in an attackable way :D

Of course, now I’m curious about what happens in the floating point [0..1) case in [std]libc++...

<end hat>

I stil feel that the random interfaces in the standard library are bad: they make it hard to do the most simple cases, and they make it easy to make errors in complex/sensitive cases.

—Oliver

> On Aug 30, 2025, at 1:45 PM, zxuiji via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> Uh, why is this difficult? It's literally just this:
>
> int rand_of_range( int *seed, int min, int max )
> { int cap = max - min; return cap ? (rand_r(seed) % cap) + min : min; }
>
> On Sat, 30 Aug 2025 at 21:19, Paul Caprioli via Std-Proposals <std-proposals_at_[hidden] <mailto:std-proposals_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>>
>> > Can you guys please add a feature, where you can limit the random, without math?
>> > I ask because memorizing int random_num = min_val + rand() % (max_val - min_val + 1); isnt easy
>>
>> Is std::uniform_int_distribution suitable for your use?
>> --
>> Std-Proposals mailing list
>> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden] <mailto:Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]>
>> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals
> --
> Std-Proposals mailing list
> Std-Proposals_at_[hidden]
> https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/std-proposals