RE: [sv-ec] Question about seeding $urandom

This is 0002735: Ballot Comment #48: Chaining of method calls

This has been left as an enhancement for the next PAR.

Dave


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org]
On
> Behalf Of Ryan, Ray
> Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:26 AM
> To: Jonathan Bromley
> Cc: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org; sv-ec@server.eda.org
> Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Question about seeding $urandom
> 
> I agree that
> 
> 	process::self().srandom(seed)
> 
> is NOT legal (because this uses a return result as a prefix).
> 
> This would be more apparent if the empty paren's weren't
> optional on function calls.
> 
> - Ray
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org
> > [mailto:owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Bromley
> > Sent: Thursday, June 11, 2009 1:19 AM
> > To: Cliff Cummings
> > Cc: owner-sv-ec@server.eda.org; sv-ec@server.eda.org
> > Subject: RE: [sv-ec] Question about seeding $urandom
> >
> > > [Cliff] found another working example of what I needed:
> > >
> > > process::self.srandom(seed);
> >
> > Yikes!  Is this legal?  I didn't think we could use a method
> > return result as the prefix to a .method() call.
> > Are the rules subtly bent for static methods?
> > --
> > Jonathan Bromley
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message has been scanned for viruses and
> > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> > believed to be clean.
> >
> >
> 
> --
> This message has been scanned for viruses and
> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
> believed to be clean.
> 


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.