I just found out the hard way that srand(1)
resets the PRNG of C(++) to the state before any call to srand
(as defined in the reference).
However, the seed 0 seems to do the same, or the state before any call to srand
seems to use the seed 0.
What’s the difference between those two calls or what is the reason they do the same thing?
For example this code (execute on Ideone)
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
int main() {
for (int seed = 0; seed < 4; seed++ ) {
printf( "Seed %d:", seed);
srand( seed );
for(int i = 0; i < 5; i++ )
printf( " %10d", rand() );
printf( "\n");
}
return 0;
}
returns
Seed 0: 1804289383 846930886 1681692777 1714636915 1957747793
Seed 1: 1804289383 846930886 1681692777 1714636915 1957747793
Seed 2: 1505335290 1738766719 190686788 260874575 747983061
Seed 3: 1205554746 483147985 844158168 953350440 612121425
The srand() function sets the starting point for producing a series of pseudo-random integers. If srand() is not called, the rand() seed is set as if srand(1) were called at program start. Any other value for seed sets the generator to a different starting point. The rand() function generates the pseudo-random numbers.
time(0) gives the time in seconds since the Unix epoch, which is a pretty good "unpredictable" seed (you're guaranteed your seed will be the same only once, unless you start your program multiple times within the same second).
The rand() function in C++ is used to generate random numbers; it will generate the same number every time we run the program. In order to seed the rand() function, srand(unsigned int seed) is used. The srand() function sets the initial point for generating the pseudo-random numbers.
The srand() function sets the seed for the rand() function. The seed for rand() function is 1 by default. It means that if no srand() is called before rand() , the rand() function behaves as if it was seeded with srand(1) .
How glibc does it:
around line 181 of glibc/stdlib/random_r.c, inside function
__srandom_r
/* We must make sure the seed is not 0. Take arbitrarily 1 in this case. */ if (seed == 0) seed = 1;
But that's just how glibc does it. It depends on the implementation of the C standard library.
It is probably an implementation detail. The standard mandates that the random seed 1 is special, and the internal register of your specific random generator algorithm is probably zero-initialized, thus causing the same random sequence for seed(0) and seed(1). I'd even wager that the first line of your srand() implementation looks like:
if ( seed == 1 ) seed = 0;
to force standard-conformant behaviour.
Generally, the random number generators for rand() and srand() are not required to give different sequences for different seeds, but the same sequence for the same seed. So, don't rely on different seeds generating different random sequences, and you should be fine. If not, welcome to implementation-specific fun.
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