![]() |
Hello and Welcome from United States to the UNIX and Linux Forums! Thank You for Visiting and Joining Our Global Community.
|
|
google unix.com
|
|||||||
| Forums | Register | Forum Rules | Links | Albums | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| High Level Programming Post questions about C, C++, Java, SQL, and other programming languages here. |
More UNIX and Linux Forum Topics You Might Find Helpful
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| how can i isolate the random sequence of numbers using awk? | rcon1 | UNIX for Dummies Questions & Answers | 2 | 01-09-2008 09:06 AM |
| generating random numbers with hamming distance 4 | hack_tom | Shell Programming and Scripting | 2 | 04-29-2007 01:27 AM |
| genrating pseudo random numbers | hack_tom | Shell Programming and Scripting | 7 | 04-27-2007 10:10 PM |
| Random numbers without repetition | asal_email | UNIX for Dummies Questions & Answers | 8 | 07-14-2005 04:02 AM |
| Sed - Replacing numbers w/asteriks in random location in a file | giannicello | UNIX for Dummies Questions & Answers | 9 | 10-04-2001 12:03 AM |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
||||
|
How to set constrain on random numbers in c
Hi,
I am currently trying to generate multiple random numbers in C for different variable:- die1=1+(rand()%5); die2=1+(rand()%5); die3=1+(rand()%5); die4=1+(rand()%5); But I need to contrain the total of die1, die2,die3 and die4 to be 5 as well. If i insert die1+die2+die3+die4=5, i do not think it will constrain the distribution. Please advise. Thanks. -Jason |
|
||||
|
Yeah. I understood the concept. But do we have ways to automate them to generate all sorts of combination in this constrain?
I tried to find from internet related to these cases; they arent related. Most of them are just giving random numbers generation. As I mentioned previously, if i constrain the total value after the random number is generated for these variables, it wont work because it is not dependent. Unless I can slot something in between the rand? Thanks. -Jason |
|
|||||
|
If you had, say, 100, to distribute 5 into 5 variables: You pick a number from 1 to 100, let's say you get 20. The first variable gets the 20. Now 100 - 20 = 80 is left. So pick a number between 1 and 80. You stop when you get to only 1 variable and it gets the remainder. Or if the amount left reaches zero, you stop early and the rest of the variable must be zero.
|
|
||||
|
Hi,
I get the idea now. Thanks. But i just have a thought if that is the case, would it be very bias to have the top variables always get the most of the values rather than the bottom ones? What I expected at the first place is to have fair distribution of cake among the variables. let say i have only consider 3 possbile values, (0,1 and 2). And have 5 variables. If I did consider the below idea, in all the cases, the second of third variables always get the most rather than the fourth and fifth variable. Please advise. Thanks.. Rgrds, Jason |
|
|||||
|
I can't help you there since your test case is so very constrained. Except to say that only a very few possible outcomes are going to satify you. Enumerate them and pick one.
Getting back to my test case, you could preallocate 10 to each variable and then distibute the remaining 50 as I indicated. Or you could distribute the numbers one at a time. Cycle though each variable and generate a 0 or 1. Add that to each variable and subtract it from the mass to be distributed. |
|
||||
|
Quote:
n=1+rand()%4 switch(n) { case 1: // use perderabo idea starting with die1 - die4 case 2: // use perderabo idea starting with die2 - die4,die1 in circular way case 3: //and so on........... } i know its not a very pretty solution but considering your unique constraints this is the best solution i got |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|