Received: from cgsleo.taketimeforhealth22.com ([23.250.45.196]:54622) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1) (envelope-from ) id 1XgDSD-0000AD-5D for lojban@lojban.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 06:57:02 -0700 Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 06:56:48 -0700 From: Slender and Slim Reply-to: To: Subject: Losing weight fast, REALLY fast Message-ID: Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_bar: -

Dr.Oz's Safe and reliable weight-loss
solutions have never been so easy.

oz-Live Posted on 10/20/2014
1,445 Comments

Dr. Oz explores the latest trends, that actually work.

kick-start Your Fat-Loss , Pt 1 (Drop 1LB Day)
http://www.taketimeforhealth22.com/inoculation/democracies/waggoned/ruminatingly.xhtml

Maybe you just had a baby or you've been trying to lose stomach-weight for years. Whatever the case, this makes it a breeze, and the best part is you don't have to go to the gym or starve yourself.

 

 

nav 3
From The ShareCare Family PO-Box 277 Moran TX 76464. Thanks for being part of a great community.
We understand if you want to end messages and we make it easy to do so [settings-1]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


@Albert: the answer to your literal question is "it isn't useful, at least not from a testability/repeatability perspective". The only way round that is to encapsulate your own RNG's state; the new C++ library does that for you.Oliver CharlesworthOct 10 at 7:43
Re:their response, sincesrandis neither thread-safe nor reentrant having it called multiple timesfrom different threadsis not safe at all (randhas similar problems). There is a real, fundamental problem here which is addressed with the possibility for multiple generators in C++11.Benjamin BannierOct 10 at 7:48
2
@Albert Your question is much like "Shouldn't there be world peace?" ... regardless of the answer, there isn't. That libxml2 callssrandis a fact. Just move on and do as this answer suggests.Jim BalterOct 10 at 7:51
@Albert It's a pointless philosophical exercise. The maintainer isn't going to change it just because of a discussion here. It's certainly not a bug, but it seems to be a problem for you ... so again, do something else.Jim BalterOct 10 at 7:58
@MSalters "does not matter in the least... only need to know thatsrand()is calledat leastonce." - itcanmatter: the period guarantees have been lost/reset, so earlier sequences may be repeated much earlier than otherwise (not only - but most dramatically - when several of the calls tosrand()use saytime(NULL)as a seed).Tony DOct 10 at 10:27