liamg_uw at hotmail.com
Thu Jul 5 11:04:30 CEST 2018
Each new instance of [random] already seeds itself differently, so adding $0 isn't going to change anything there. The problem is that the seeds are repeated when you restart PD, so you'll get the same pseudo-random results every time you open the program. $0 won't help here, because the $0 values also repeat when you restart PD.
From: Pd-list <pd-list-bounces at lists.iem.at> on behalf of Peter P. <peterparker at fastmail.com>
Sent: 02 July 2018 18:26
To: pd-list at lists.iem.at
Subject: Re: [PD] Random
* Liam Goodacre <liamg_uw at hotmail.com> [2018-07-02 06:34]:
> Perhaps using $0 might be better then as it is unique and automatically
> But $0 itself is deterministic--the first instance is 1003, the second is 1004, etc.
Yes, but it will provide a different seed to [random] inside every
abstraction. Forgive me if I understand your intentions in the wrong
Pd-list at lists.iem.at mailing list
UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pd-list