Tu nasuwa się problem, nie wiem gdzie znajduje się ciało funkcji Rand()
Skoro piszesz program
którego zadaniem będzie odgadywanie wylosowanych liczb.
to nie rozumiem po co Ci to. Ale skoro chcesz.
Ciało funkcji rand będzie się różnić zależnie od implementacji. Jednak większość implementacji i tak korzysta z LCG( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_congruential_generator ). Implementacja funkcji rand z glibc 2.24:
int
rand (void)
{
return (int) __random ();
}
long int
__random (void)
{
int32_t retval;
__libc_lock_lock (lock);
(void) __random_r (&unsafe_state, &retval);
__libc_lock_unlock (lock);
return retval;
}
int
__random_r (struct random_data *buf, int32_t *result)
{
int32_t *state;
if (buf == NULL || result == NULL)
goto fail;
state = buf->state;
if (buf->rand_type == TYPE_0)
{
int32_t val = state[0];
val = ((state[0] * 1103515245) + 12345) & 0x7fffffff;
state[0] = val;
*result = val;
}
else
{
int32_t *fptr = buf->fptr;
int32_t *rptr = buf->rptr;
int32_t *end_ptr = buf->end_ptr;
int32_t val;
val = *fptr += *rptr;
/* Chucking least random bit. */
*result = (val >> 1) & 0x7fffffff;
++fptr;
if (fptr >= end_ptr)
{
fptr = state;
++rptr;
}
else
{
++rptr;
if (rptr >= end_ptr)
rptr = state;
}
buf->fptr = fptr;
buf->rptr = rptr;
}
return 0;
fail:
__set_errno (EINVAL);
return -1;
}
#define TYPE_0 0
#define BREAK_0 8
#define DEG_0 0
#define SEP_0 0
/* x**7 + x**3 + 1. */
#define TYPE_1 1
#define BREAK_1 32
#define DEG_1 7
#define SEP_1 3
/* x**15 + x + 1. */
#define TYPE_2 2
#define BREAK_2 64
#define DEG_2 15
#define SEP_2 1
/* x**31 + x**3 + 1. */
#define TYPE_3 3
#define BREAK_3 128
#define DEG_3 31
#define SEP_3 3
/* x**63 + x + 1. */
#define TYPE_4 4
#define BREAK_4 256
#define DEG_4 63
#define SEP_4 1
/* Array versions of the above information to make code run faster.
Relies on fact that TYPE_i == i. */
#define MAX_TYPES 5 /* Max number of types above. */
/* Initially, everything is set up as if from:
initstate(1, randtbl, 128);
Note that this initialization takes advantage of the fact that srandom
advances the front and rear pointers 10*rand_deg times, and hence the
rear pointer which starts at 0 will also end up at zero; thus the zeroth
element of the state information, which contains info about the current
position of the rear pointer is just
(MAX_TYPES * (rptr - state)) + TYPE_3 == TYPE_3. */
static int32_t randtbl[DEG_3 + 1] =
{
TYPE_3,
-1726662223, 379960547, 1735697613, 1040273694, 1313901226,
1627687941, -179304937, -2073333483, 1780058412, -1989503057,
-615974602, 344556628, 939512070, -1249116260, 1507946756,
-812545463, 154635395, 1388815473, -1926676823, 525320961,
-1009028674, 968117788, -123449607, 1284210865, 435012392,
-2017506339, -911064859, -370259173, 1132637927, 1398500161,
-205601318,
};
static struct random_data unsafe_state =
{
/* FPTR and RPTR are two pointers into the state info, a front and a rear
pointer. These two pointers are always rand_sep places apart, as they
cycle through the state information. (Yes, this does mean we could get
away with just one pointer, but the code for random is more efficient
this way). The pointers are left positioned as they would be from the call:
initstate(1, randtbl, 128);
(The position of the rear pointer, rptr, is really 0 (as explained above
in the initialization of randtbl) because the state table pointer is set
to point to randtbl[1] (as explained below).) */
.fptr = &randtbl[SEP_3 + 1],
.rptr = &randtbl[1],
/* The following things are the pointer to the state information table,
the type of the current generator, the degree of the current polynomial
being used, and the separation between the two pointers.
Note that for efficiency of random, we remember the first location of
the state information, not the zeroth. Hence it is valid to access
state[-1], which is used to store the type of the R.N.G.
Also, we remember the last location, since this is more efficient than
indexing every time to find the address of the last element to see if
the front and rear pointers have wrapped. */
.state = &randtbl[1],
.rand_type = TYPE_3,
.rand_deg = DEG_3,
.rand_sep = SEP_3,
.end_ptr = &randtbl[sizeof (randtbl) / sizeof (randtbl[0])]
};
btw. W C++ zamiast rand powinno się korzystać z biblioteki random, której algorytmy losowania liczb są o wiele lepsze.
edit: standard C zawiera bardzo prostą implementacje funkcji rand:
static unsigned long int next = 1;
int rand(void) // RAND_MAX assumed to be 32767
{
next = next * 1103515245 + 12345;
return (unsigned int)(next/65536) % 32768;
}
void srand(unsigned int seed)
{
next = seed;
}
