Message218384
| Author | tim.peters |
|---|---|
| Recipients | Arfrever, alex, dstufft, ezio.melotti, mark.dickinson, neologix, pitrou, rhettinger, tim.peters, vstinner |
| Date | 2014-05-12.23:46:52 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1399938412.56.0.710335138173.issue21470@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
> Thanks for the explanation. It's much clearer now. Maybe, but it's also overblown - LOL ;-) That is, no matter what the starting seed, the user will see a microscopically tiny span of the Twister's entire period. So all those "provably correct" properties that depend on whole-period analysis remain pretty much theoretical no matter what we do. It's just a "better safe than sorry" thing. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2014-05-12 23:46:52 | tim.peters | set | recipients: + tim.peters, rhettinger, mark.dickinson, pitrou, vstinner, ezio.melotti, Arfrever, alex, neologix, dstufft |
| 2014-05-12 23:46:52 | tim.peters | set | messageid: <1399938412.56.0.710335138173.issue21470@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2014-05-12 23:46:52 | tim.peters | link | issue21470 messages |
| 2014-05-12 23:46:52 | tim.peters | create | |