Question

I am trying to get a uniform random number between 0 and 1 in C++ without using boost. I do not want to depend on the library.

Whenever I start my program, I seed with:
srand( time(NULL) );

Then I print 8 random numbers. I separate different runs of the program with a blank line:

Random number: 0.226063
Random number: 0.449186
Random number: 0.474514
Random number: 0.160779
Random number: 0.220868
Random number: 0.136685
Random number: 0.260120
Random number: 0.843334

Random number: 0.226181
Random number: 0.422253
Random number: 0.808594
Random number: 0.040531
Random number: 0.212377
Random number: 0.421073
Random number: 0.965790
Random number: 0.026305

Random number: 0.226306
Random number: 0.526858
Random number: 0.898279
Random number: 0.378934
Random number: 0.736653
Random number: 0.924420
Random number: 0.718503
Random number: 0.888140

Random number: 0.226463
Random number: 0.157614
Random number: 0.010386
Random number: 0.551936
Random number: 0.391998
Random number: 0.303603
Random number: 0.659396
Random number: 0.465434

Why is the first number almost exactly the same every time? I don’t get it. Should I toss the first number out or something?

---

Sample code:

#include <iostream>

int main() {
  srand( time(NULL) );
  printf("%f\n", (float)rand()/RAND_MAX);
  printf("%f\n", (float)rand()/RAND_MAX);
  printf("%f\n", (float)rand()/RAND_MAX);
  printf("%f\n", (float)rand()/RAND_MAX);
  printf("%f\n", (float)rand()/RAND_MAX);
  printf("%f\n", (float)rand()/RAND_MAX);
  printf("%f\n", (float)rand()/RAND_MAX);
  printf("%f\n", (float)rand()/RAND_MAX);
}

Answer 1

No, don’t throw out the first one. That skews the results. The sequence {1,1,1,1,1,1,1} is exactly as likely to appear as any other arbitrary seven-number sequence despite the propensity of humans trying to find meaning in everything 🙂

Trying to fiddle with it because you don’t like the sequence makes the random number generation worse, not better.

For what it’s worth, you should make sure that your runs are at least a second apart so you don’t use the same seed (that doesn’t appear to be the case here). Other than that, use the results that the PRNG gives you as-is or find a better generator.

Either you’re a statistician/cryptographer where you wouldn’t be using a normal random function, or it really doesn’t matter! For the vast majority of situations, it’s the latter.

---

If you don’t want a fancy one (or one involving a large amount of extra stuff) and you’re just not happy with the one provided with your implementation, it’s easy to implement one based on the gcc version, something like:

seed = (1103515245 * seed + 12345) & 0xffffffff
return seed & 0x7fffffff

And keep in mind the initial seed value is calculated on the argument supplied to srand with a modulus of 231-1 to minimise the sequence having a linear dependence on the initial seed (there’s still linearity for the sequence, just not from the initial seed value).

The following code may make your life easier if you’re just looking for a quick solution without depending on external libraries or spending time implementing the more complex generators:

// Assume 32-bit integer.
static int seed = 1;
void mySRand (int newseed) {
    seed = newseed % 0x7fffffff;
}
int myRand() {
    seed = 1103515245 * seed + 12345;
    return seed & 0x7fffffff;
}

---

The following program will actually give you an idea as to what that algorithm will do with small changes to the seed value provided to mySRand.

It gets the initial seed from time (NULL) then shows you what the initial values are out of myRand for twenty sequential seed values, along with the percentage changes.

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <time.h>
#include <math.h>

static int seed = 1;
void mySRand (int newseed) { seed = newseed % 0x7fffffff; }
int myRand() { seed = 1103515245 * seed + 12345; return seed & 0x7fffffff; }

int main (void) {
    int i, xyzzy, val, lastVal;
    double avg, diff;
    xyzzy = time (NULL);
    mySRand (xyzzy);
    lastVal = myRand();
    printf ("seed=%d, val=%12d\n", xyzzy, lastVal);
    for (i = 0; i < 20; i++) {
        mySRand (++xyzzy);
        val = myRand();
        avg = val; avg = (avg + lastVal) / 2;
        diff = 100 * fabs (avg - val) / avg;
        printf ("seed=%d, val=%12d, avg=%12.1f, %%chg=%f\n",
            xyzzy, val, avg, diff);
        lastVal = val;
    }
    return 0;
}

The percentage changes are based on the difference between the current value and the average between the current and the previous so as to hopefully not introduce bias. Sample output is:

seed=1324533721, val=  1092183454
seed=1324533722, val=    48215051, avg= 570199252.5, %chg=91.544175
seed=1324533723, val=  1151730296, avg= 599972673.5, %chg=91.963792
seed=1324533724, val=   107761893, avg= 629746094.5, %chg=82.888041
seed=1324533725, val=  1211277138, avg= 659519515.5, %chg=83.660545
seed=1324533726, val=   167308735, avg= 689292936.5, %chg=75.727484
seed=1324533727, val=  1270823980, avg= 719066357.5, %chg=76.732504
seed=1324533728, val=   226855577, avg= 748839778.5, %chg=69.705726
seed=1324533729, val=  1330370822, avg= 778613199.5, %chg=70.864150
seed=1324533730, val=   286402419, avg= 808386620.5, %chg=64.571108
seed=1324533731, val=  1389917664, avg= 838160041.5, %chg=65.829626
seed=1324533732, val=   345949261, avg= 867933462.5, %chg=60.141039
seed=1324533733, val=  1449464506, avg= 897706883.5, %chg=61.463005
seed=1324533734, val=   405496103, avg= 927480304.5, %chg=56.279815
seed=1324533735, val=  1509011348, avg= 957253725.5, %chg=57.639642
seed=1324533736, val=   465042945, avg= 987027146.5, %chg=52.884483
seed=1324533737, val=  1568558190, avg=1016800567.5, %chg=54.264095
seed=1324533738, val=   524589787, avg=1046573988.5, %chg=49.875518
seed=1324533739, val=  1628105032, avg=1076347409.5, %chg=51.262038
seed=1324533740, val=   584136629, avg=1106120830.5, %chg=47.190523
seed=1324533741, val=  1687651874, avg=1135894251.5, %chg=48.574735

so you can see there’s actually a large difference in starting values based on initial seeds that are close together.