Have you ever compiled using 'gui' and should have used 'console' and then had to use the Task Manager to kill the exe? I lost count on the number of times that I have until I learnt of this. '#Console On I now put that as my first statement on everything that I write in WinFBE, it takes priority ov...

I should have egg on my face but I don't do egg on my face, I just smile.

However, we still have to visit the Wiki as opposed to being advised of a new update.

@fxm Thanks for the 2019.11.08 update to the Help manual regarding RND, it is no longer confusing. I think that it would be worthwhile to have a locked topic somewhere advising when an updated Help manual has been published; and, perhaps, a synopsis of changes. At the moment I call at 'Index of /stw...

Ah, I knew of "E", which has been around since the beginning of programming, but I did not know that we could use "D" instead, which explains 421d+1 = 4120. To my mind a choice of "D" or "E" is silly, as is "&, l", "!, f", and "#, ...

I just tried that myself, but 421d+1 should have worked.

fxm wrote:What is the difference?

Run the code with '421d+1' and then '422d'.

Try this:

I get

I agree with everything except the last statement which should read:

By using 'Int(rnd_range(69d, 422d))' FB' in your above code, the results become good.

PCG32II has recently been updated to replace the asm code used in the integral range function with, what I call, dodicat's Clng/Mod method. In FB's Help file under Rnd we have rnd_range to give a random double in the range first to last as doubles. For a random integral number we are given a method ...

The asm code in MsWsRange.bas, in post #4, can now be replaced with 'Return Clng(TempVar Mod (Two-One+1)) + One'. This only gives an increase in speed of about 16% but this is because of the twin random number aspect employed to give us prediction resistance.

DODICAT is up there at last. http://deltarho.org.uk/Downloads/confused.png You already were for as long as I have been a member and goodness knows for how long before that and many members would reckon the same I shouldn't wonder. I have noticed that many class acts underrate themselves which drive...

@dodicat I gave PCG32II a good work out using the Clng code and it didn't put a foot wrong. I have published an updated PCG32II and revised the Help file giving you credit for the new integral range code. It is worth noting that in 64-bit mode the Clng method is only 25% faster than the asm method. ...

@Provoni PCG32II has been updated. The asm in the integral range function has been replaced by code devised by dodicat giving an increase of 60% in the throughput. You can get the new package here . That 60% increase is for 32-bit mode, with 64-bit mode the increase is 25%. PCG32II is faster overall...

The asm code in the integral range function has been replaced by a single FreeBASIC statement devised by dodicat. The throughput has increased by 60% - an astonishing increase. Rather than post the source code the following link is a zip including the updated PCG32II.bas and PCG32II.chm. The Help ha...

I have just put '2024863461 mod 1715 -857' and '2036278952 mod 1715 -857' into Online Big Number Calculator and High precision calculator and got -166 and 285 repectively. So, the second and third Prints are wrong. The question is then do we have a bug in Mod? So, with my post beginning "OK, yo...

In PCG32II I have replaced the asm with map = Abs(One) + 5 One = One + map Two = Two + map Return (TempVar Mod (Two-One+1)) + One - map which is over 60% faster than the asm - a very significant increase. I have tried a variety of ranges using PCG32II with the revised code and all seems well. Howeve...