Re: [AD] Pending patches request

[Angelo Mottola <a.mottola@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>> - rand() replaced by (rand()+(rand()>>16)) on test.c
>>   This should cause no harm to anyone.
> 
> Not very nice, you should be using srand() in that case. Did you try the
> solution used in the demo program?

srand(time(NULL)) at the start of the program?
Yes I tried it, and it didn't improve randomness in any way.
The problem is the OSX libc rand() implementation places the most random
bits in the higher word, while the lower word always gets values that repeat
somewhat often. On Intel machines it seems to be the contrary.
So (rand()+(rand()>>16)) should solve the issue...

>> - UTF16-LE patch made by Eric and posted here sometime ago
> 
> This patch is only a last resort solution. We have first to understand why we
> are not able to manipulate UTF16-BE, especially on big-endian platforms.

I agree; I'll investigate more on this.

-- 
Angelo Mottola
a.mottola@xxxxxxxxxx