Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2000 10:26:26 -0500 From: Paul Gilbert <pgilbert@bank-banque-canada.ca>
Since set.seed seems a suitable name and it would help compatibility, would set.seed(seed, kind = 0) be a suitable interface? Or would people prefer RNGinit(kind, seed)
Before making too many changes to random number generation it might be useful
to
look at the code below which is part of my syskern package. It sets the seed,
As I understand it, that does not do what either S-PLUS's set.seed does or what Ben asks for, as the seed has to be of a length and values appropriate to the RNGkind. The request was to use a single value: otherwise why not just assign to .Random.seed? Personally I do not like the altering of system functions in user packages, as what happens if two or more people do it? It depends on the load order.
Brian D. Ripley, ripley@stats.ox.ac.uk Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272860 (secr) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595 -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe" (in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._