Explv Posted March 26, 2017 Posted March 26, 2017 13 minutes ago, Polymorphism said: Yay or nay, that's all i need to know. If you're talking about MethodProvider.gRandom, then yes it does. 1
Polymorphism Posted March 26, 2017 Author Posted March 26, 2017 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Explv said: If you're talking about MethodProvider.gRandom, then yes it does. I thought as much, just needed reassurance. Thank you sir<3 Edited March 26, 2017 by Polymorphism
Reveance Posted March 28, 2017 Posted March 28, 2017 Does gRandom works as expected for you guys? I just tested it, got unexpected result and posted a bug report but I'm kinda starting to doubt as it'd be weird that nobody would have noticed I suppose: Using MethodProvider.gRandom(600, 200) which should be based on normal distribution I got the following result: Also, the api says that the method caps the values, however I suspect that it returns all the values above the cap number as the cap number, instead of regenerating a new random. This makes the last (and first) number should up way higher than the rest 1
Reveance Posted March 28, 2017 Posted March 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Stimpack said: 15 million results using gRandom(600, 200): Yeah this shows it much better. This isn't normal distribution but those capped values are really bad mind if I use your image in the bug report I already posted?
Stimpack Posted March 28, 2017 Posted March 28, 2017 1 minute ago, Reveance said: Yeah this shows it much better. This isn't normal distribution but those capped values are really bad mind if I use your image in the bug report I already posted? yeah sure, do whatever u want with it. i'm sure there's a reason the values come out like that though. let's hear from @Alek 1
Alek Posted March 28, 2017 Posted March 28, 2017 Adding methods like gRandom and moveMouseRandomly were a mistake. Explv answered your question.