unexpected behaviour of rnorm()

That's the maximum of 5000 normals, right?  That's pushing the accuracy of
some internal calculations too hard.

If you want to do this, you should use

RNGkind(, "Inversion")

Just of curiosity, is this a general recommendation? I.e., should I put
that in my .Rprofile and get a generally better RNG? Speed issues?

That's not the default for back-compatibility reasons.

which made me wonder.

G?ran


-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-help 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-help-request at stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._