Re: BC break with rand() where min > max

What is the sense to use min > max, in general? It should 'flip' arguments automatically in this case? 2016-08-08 18:36 GMT-03:00 Leigh <leight@gmail.com>: > Hi all, > > There has been an unforeseen break with rand() when the minimum value is > greater than the maximum. > > Prior to 7.1 rand() would happily accept backwards parameters and return a > value, however in the 7.1 branch it now emits a warning and returns false. > > I've preemptively committed a fix to allow min > max and return a value as > in previous versions, but have kept the warning. > > Looking for some feedback/opinions on whether anyone else thinks this > should be fixed differently (or not at all). > > N.B. this also changes the behaviour of mt_rand to now accept min > max -- David Rodrigues