[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: useful additional procedure for random bytes?

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 27 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 27 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 05:20:14PM +0000, David Rush wrote:
> Bengt Kleberg <eleberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > since most cryptographical
> > algorithms use not integers, but arrays of bytes, 
> This opens up another whole can of worms, since Scheme doesn't have
> bytes. This is one of my pet peeves. I'm not terribly sure that going
> down this road is a good idea.
> > perhaps a list (of specified length), with integers 0-255 as items,
> > would be the most versatile value of such a procedure.
> Except that you can already generate range-limited integers, so I
> think there's no real loss here.

Good point.  An implementation could convert a large random integer into 
a stream of bytes for this sort of application.  


Attachment: pgpAo6WjYTG1T.pgp
Description: PGP signature