Why Aren’t `std::uniform_int_distribution` and `std::uniform_int_distribution` Allowed?

by

There is a library working group unresolved[1] issue on this uniform_int_distribution<unsigned char> should be permitted and it says, amongst other things:

I am not aware of anything in <random> that works with 16-bit
integers but fails with 8-bit integers, so I suspect that IntType
and UIntType could simply be extended to permit the char family.
Alternatively, this change could be limited to
uniform_int_distribution alone, where it is definitely safe. A
<random> expert should decide which change is best.

The proposed resolution is to change the restriction to allow standard integer types:

that has a template type parameter named IntType is undefined unless
the corresponding template argument is cv-unqualified and is a a
standard integer type (3.9.1 [basic.fundamental]

and:

that has a template type parameter named UIntType is undefined
unless the corresponding template argument is cv-unqualified and is a
standard unsigned integer type (3.9.1 [basic.fundamental])

This gets you unsigned / signed char although not uint8_t or int8_t but they are likely equivalent. Extended integral types were exluded to simplify the wording and maximize consensus:

This also excludes extended integral types and wide char types, which seem like nice-to-haves at best. I have no objection to supporting any of those types; I just picked this to simplify the wording and hopefully maximize consensus.

Note, this excludes char since it is implementation defined whether char is signed or not.

Note this topic was also brought up in the std-discussion list.

Jonathan Wakely notes this proposal is controversial and commented that his notes from the last discussion include the following:

that it was very definitely intentional that single byte integers are not supported, not an accidental omission, and so we should be careful about just changing that without consulting the designers of the C++11

He suggests adding a member to random_device to provide single bytes, which is seems like a reasonable alternative.

[1] The issue has been closed as “Not A Defect“, meaning that it will not be resolved as a defect report. Instead a formal proposal for the change will be required.

More Related Contents:

  1. Generate random numbers using C++11 random library
  2. Why do I get the same sequence for every run with std::random_device with mingw gcc4.8.1?
  3. Random number generation in C++11: how to generate, how does it work? [closed]
  4. How to succinctly, portably, and thoroughly seed the mt19937 PRNG?
  5. If we seed c++11 mt19937 as the same on different machines, will we get the same sequence of random numbers
  6. Why is the new random library better than std::rand()?
  7. Does std::mt19937 require warmup?
  8. Random output different between implementations
  9. Is 1.0 a valid output from std::generate_canonical?
  10. Vary range of uniform_int_distribution
  11. The implementation of random_device in VS2010?
  12. stl random distributions and portability
  13. C++11 random numbers
  14. C++11 cross compiler/standard library random distribution reproducibility
  15. Why does reading a record struct fields from std::istream fail, and how can I fix it?
  16. Generating random integer from a range
  17. Compiling C++11 with g++
  18. How do I pass a unique_ptr argument to a constructor or a function?
  19. Where is the lock for a std::atomic?
  20. What are the rules for the “…” token in the context of variadic templates?
  21. Default, value and zero initialization mess
  22. What exactly is a ‘side-effect’ in C++?
  23. How Does std::enable_if work?
  24. Vector of std::function with different signatures
  25. Why are std::atomic objects not copyable?
  26. Is it smart to replace boost::thread and boost::mutex with c++11 equivalents?
  27. Move or Named Return Value Optimization (NRVO)?
  28. Default Move Constructor in Visual Studio 2013 (Update 3)
  29. Are lambdas inlined like functions in C++?
  30. Reference invalidation after applying reverse_iterator on a custom made iterator

Leave a Comment