|Pathologically Eclectic Rubbish Lister|
Re: Non-Repetitive Random Numbersby BrowserUk (Pope)
|on Apr 05, 2013 at 13:10 UTC||Need Help??|
The problem with most of the solutions offered is that they create a list the size of the range of numbers required (100,000) in order to obtain the sample of 30 values. Many compound that by additionally creating an array and a hash.
Not so bad whilst the range is in the 100s of thousands but once you need a range in the 10s of millions or more, your going to run out of memory pretty quick in order to create those 30 values.
This will produce as many unique values (in a random order) as you wish to fetch for any range upto 4 billion, whilst never consuming more than 512MB. (and considerably less for smaller ranges. eg. 0-100,000 will use < 13kB.)
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.