I've seen a lot of code where random numbers are generated like
// random integers in the interval [1, 10]
Math.floor(Math.random()*10 + 1)
Anyway, I feel like I'm missing something. Why don't people use the more succint way
Math.ceil(Math.random()*10);
?
I tried to test the randomness and it seems true so far.
In fact, the subsequent code
// will generate random integers from 1 to 4
var frequencies = [ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 ]; // not using the first place
var randomNumber;
for ( var i = 0; i < 1*1000*1000; ++i ) {
randomNumber = Math.ceil(Math.random()*4);
frequencies[randomNumber]++;
}
for ( var i = 1; i <= 4; ++i ) {
console.log(i +": "+ frequencies[i]);
}
prints out
1: 250103
2: 250161
3: 250163
4: 249573
What am I missing?
Quick OT: Is there a more succint way to declare and initialize frequencies? I mean like frequencies[5] = { 0 };
from C++...
as stated in MDN reference about Math.random()
Returns a floating-point, pseudo-random number in the range [0, 1) that is, from 0 (inclusive) up to but not including 1 (exclusive), which you can then scale to your desired range.
Since Math.random can return 0
, then Math.ceil(Math.random()*10)
could also return 0
and that value is out of your [1..10]
range.
About your second question, see Most efficient way to create a zero filled JavaScript array?
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With