Post History
My thoughts on the matter Does randomness need to be uniform? Nope, although it has to follow the specifications of the challenge (but if the challenge is too demanding with its randomness yo...
Answer
#2: Post edited
by
AndrewTheCodegolfer
·
2021-07-26T11:13:42Z (over 3 years ago)
- ## My thoughts on the matter
- > Does randomness need to be uniform?
- Nope, although it has to follow the specifications of the challenge (but if the challenge is too demanding with its randomness you may freely vote on the matter).
- > Can you use unseeded PRNG?
- For functions, sure thing, but for programs not at all - programs would create the same output every time and thus not be random.
- > Can you use user input as a source of randomness (eg PRNG seed)?
- Not at all - the only input which should be used is input which the challenge mentions and randomness can usually be gained through other means. If all randomness must be gained through user input, your language is incapable of giving "true" randomness (as far as that would be true to determinists) and thus should not compete.
- > Should we treat all languages as equals in this regard or be forgiving to languages with lesser randomness capability?
Treat them as equals. No good ever comes from compromising to other languages, as it just introduces loopholes that other languages can abuse.
- ## My thoughts on the matter
- > Does randomness need to be uniform?
- Nope, although it has to follow the specifications of the challenge (but if the challenge is too demanding with its randomness you may freely vote on the matter).
- > Can you use unseeded PRNG?
- For functions, sure thing, but for programs not at all - programs would create the same output every time and thus not be random.
- > Can you use user input as a source of randomness (eg PRNG seed)?
- Not at all - the only input which should be used is input which the challenge mentions and randomness can usually be gained through other means. If all randomness must be gained through user input, your language is incapable of giving "true" randomness (as far as that would be true to determinists) and thus should not compete.
- > Should we treat all languages as equals in this regard or be forgiving to languages with lesser randomness capability?
- Treat them as equals. No good ever comes from compromising to other languages, as it just introduces loopholes that other languages can abuse.
- > Are these rules eternal and universal?
- Nope... if your challenge is good enough. Rules should only be broken for challenges which have a lot of thought put behind them to make them work in spite of the rule breaking.
#1: Initial revision
by
AndrewTheCodegolfer
·
2021-07-26T11:11:33Z (over 3 years ago)
## My thoughts on the matter > Does randomness need to be uniform? Nope, although it has to follow the specifications of the challenge (but if the challenge is too demanding with its randomness you may freely vote on the matter). > Can you use unseeded PRNG? For functions, sure thing, but for programs not at all - programs would create the same output every time and thus not be random. > Can you use user input as a source of randomness (eg PRNG seed)? Not at all - the only input which should be used is input which the challenge mentions and randomness can usually be gained through other means. If all randomness must be gained through user input, your language is incapable of giving "true" randomness (as far as that would be true to determinists) and thus should not compete. > Should we treat all languages as equals in this regard or be forgiving to languages with lesser randomness capability? Treat them as equals. No good ever comes from compromising to other languages, as it just introduces loopholes that other languages can abuse.