Re: [VOTE] Object scoped RNG implementation
| From: | Guilliam Xavier | Date: | Thu, 01 Apr 2021 10:08:44 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [VOTE] Object scoped RNG implementation | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-113901@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 6:39 AM Go Kudo <zeriyoshi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone.
>
> Object scoped RNG RFC vote is now open.
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/object_scope_prng
>
> The deadline for voting is April 15.
>
> Previous discussions can be viewed below.
>
> https://externals.io/message/112765
> https://externals.io/message/112819
> https://externals.io/message/113720
>
> Regards,
> Go Kudo
>
Hello,
If I understand correctly, this would
- provide us with performant object-encapsulated (isolated from global
state) equivalents of the existing
mt_srand()/mt_rand() and
random_int() functions as well as a new "XorShift128+"; along with some
global functions for usability, notably rng_bytes() and rng_int()
respectively similar to random_bytes() and random_int() but with an
additional (first) RNG argument
- enable us to use them (the objects), as well as other (extension or
userland) implementations of the RNG\RNGInterface, for the existing
array_rand(), shuffle() and str_shuffle() functions (instead
of the
default internal MT implementation)
?
I can't vote (yes), but I just suggest you complete the stubs in the RFC
with what can been seen at <
https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/6568/files?file-filters%5B%5D=.php#diff-d469bf38690924187e7b9db4a8ab199a99394b404bb12325a789141c56edb12f>
and below, showing that the class OS has the minimal interface while
classes MT19937 and XorShift128Plus have a public `__construct(int $seed
) and implement the magic __serialize()/__unserialize()`.
Best regards,
--
Guilliam Xavier