Re: [Bug-apl] ⎕RL wrong initial value

[Blake McBride]

Since ⎕RL is defined as starting at a specific value in their language manual, and IBM APL 2 operates that way, I can imagine someone testing that value in a program to see if any random numbers had been generated previously.  (I agree it is a stupid and not entirely valid test, but I cannot predict how other people will use a standard...)

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:13 PM, Elias Mårtenson <address@hidden> wrote:

Because adopting a clearly arbitrary value that provides absolutely no benefit, instead of something slightly more logical while still conforming with the spec is, in my opinion, the better way to go.

No one is going to fork the project over this, so this is in the hands of Jürgen. Have have own opinion and I've made it clear. No need to discuss this further I think.

Regards,

Elias

On 2 July 2014 11:09, Blake McBride <address@hidden> wrote:

No need to argue.  Nowhere is the random number generator algorithm specified, but ⎕RL is.  I thought we long ago agreed that, except for extensions, we were attempting to match the IBM APL standard - for better or worse.  Additionally, in any area where it is arbitrary or pointless, why not just match the standard and avoid controversy whether you think it is meaningless or not?

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Elias Mårtenson <address@hidden> wrote:

I'd argue because GNU APL uses a different random number generator, so using the same RL value is pointless at best, and can raise unfulfilled expectations and confusion at worst.

Regards,

Elias

On 2 July 2014 10:57, Blake McBride <address@hidden> wrote:

As I've stated before, I am not smart enough to understand that spec.  IBM's language manual is readable, and the value it is clear about is what I expected.  Also, I just tested IBM APL 2.  Initial ⎕RL is 16807.  If any value is valid, why not match IBM APL 2 and their Language Manual?

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Elias Mårtenson <address@hidden> wrote:

The standard says the following:

"The initial value of random-link in a clear-workspace is that member of the internal-

value-set for random-link given by the implementation-parameter initial-random-link."

So, setting it to 1 seems to be reasonable enough.

Regards,

Elias

On 2 July 2014 10:07, Blake McBride <address@hidden> wrote:

According to the IBM APL2 Language Manual (page 421 AND page 322), ⎕RL initial value, and upon )CLEAR should be 16807.  GNU APL seems to be setting it to 1.

Thanks.

Blake