Alex Martelli <aleaxit at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...claims:
>
> Note that for even rather small len(x), the total number of
> permutations of x is larger than the period of most random number
> generators; this implies that "most" permutations of a long
> sequence can never be generated.
[snip]
> I suspect that the note is just a fossil from a time when the default
> random number generator was Whichman-Hill, with a much shorter
> period. Should this note just be removed, or instead somehow
> reworded to point out that this is not in fact a problem for the
> module's current default random number generator? Opinions welcome!
I'm recovering from a migraine, but here are my thoughts on the topic...
The number of permutations of n items is n!, which is > (n/2)^(n/2).
Solve: 2**19997 < (n/2)^(n/2)
log_2(2**19997) < log_2((n/2)^(n/2))
19997 < (n/2)*log(n/2)
Certainly with n >= 4096, the above holds (2048 * 11 = 22528)
- Josiah
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4