Return to Answer

Inserted missing class name into OP's `Util` class

edit approved Mar 22, 2023 at 11:46

My answer from here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static Random rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only it's slower (inside a loop), its randomness is... well not really good according to me..

My answer from here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only it's slower (inside a loop), its randomness is... well not really good according to me..

My answer from here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static Random rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only it's slower (inside a loop), its randomness is... well not really good according to me..

replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/

Source Link

edited May 23, 2017 at 11:55

URL Rewriter Bot

My answer from here here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only it's slower (inside a loop), its randomness is... well not really good according to me..

My answer from here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only it's slower (inside a loop), its randomness is... well not really good according to me..

My answer from here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only it's slower (inside a loop), its randomness is... well not really good according to me..

fixed it's and its

Source Link

edited Aug 11, 2014 at 19:36

frenchie

52.3k
117
321
532

My answer from here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only itsit's slower (inside a loop), it'sits randomness is... well not really good according to me..

My answer from here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only its slower (inside a loop), it's randomness is... well not really good according to me..

My answer from here:

Just reiterating the right solution:

namespace mySpace { public static class Util { private static rnd = new Random(); public static int GetRandom() { return rnd.Next(); } } }

So you can call:

var i = Util.GetRandom();

all throughout.

If you strictly need a true stateless static method to generate random numbers, you can rely on a Guid.

public static class Util { public static int GetRandom() { return Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode(); } }

It's going to be a wee bit slower, but can be much more random than Random.Next, at least from my experience.

But not:

new Random(Guid.NewGuid().GetHashCode()).Next();

The unnecessary object creation is going to make it slower especially under a loop.

And never:

new Random().Next();

Not only it's slower (inside a loop), its randomness is... well not really good according to me..

Source Link

answered Mar 31, 2013 at 12:34

nawfal

73.8k
59
342
379

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Return to Answer