On 15 September 2010 13:15, Milan Straka
* I see no motivation why to do it,
I think the motivation is that this lets other PRNG's share the same typeclass to improve compatability, but most of them don't support split and thus can't use the current class as-is.
* and personally I find the `split' method very useful.
Note that the proposal isn't to do away with split, but to shift it into its own dedicated type class. This will hopefully (if implemented) result in mersenne-random-pure64, mwc-random, etc. having RandomGen instances rather than having to learn their specific API, whilst leaving split there for use with StdGen. I'm still of two minds about this proposal: I think the idea is great, but that aspects of the Random class would then require SplittableGen rather than RandomGen for "sanity" (i.e. randoms and randomRs). -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic Ivan.Miljenovic@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com