Message267897
| Author |
lemburg |
| Recipients |
Colm Buckley, Lukasa, Theodore Tso, alex, doko, dstufft, larry, lemburg, martin.panter, matejcik, ned.deily, pitti, python-dev, rhettinger, skrah, thomas-petazzoni, vstinner, ztane |
| Date |
2016年06月08日.21:04:48 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<57588868.3030307@egenix.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<1465418971.68.0.478744503659.issue26839@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
On 08.06.2016 22:49, Larry Hastings wrote:
>
> Third, because the os module is in general a thin wrapper over what the OS provides, I disapprove of "cryptorandom()" and "pseudorandom()" going into the os module. There are no functions with these names on any OS of which I'm aware. This is why I proposed "os.getrandom(n, block=True)". From its signature, the function it calls on your OS will be obvious, and its semantics on your OS will be documented by your OS.
>
> Thus I am completely unwilling to add os.cryptorandom() and os.pseudorandom() in 3.5.2.
That was a sketch for 3.6 to resolve the ambiguity between the
different use cases.
You're right, it's better to move such things to the random
module. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2016年06月08日 21:04:48 | lemburg | set | recipients:
+ lemburg, rhettinger, doko, vstinner, larry, matejcik, ned.deily, alex, skrah, python-dev, martin.panter, ztane, dstufft, pitti, Lukasa, thomas-petazzoni, Colm Buckley, Theodore Tso |
| 2016年06月08日 21:04:48 | lemburg | link | issue26839 messages |
| 2016年06月08日 21:04:48 | lemburg | create |
|