Channels ▼


Random Numbers in a Range Using Generic Programming

Source Code Accompanies This Article. Download It Now.


The supplied code (available online at can be used to estimate the runtime optimization resulting from the use of SmartRange. The theoretical limit is 25 percent off the original runtime: Going down from the expected 2 calls to next() per each call to next(max) when the probability of rejection is 1/2, to 1.5 expected calls to next() when the probability of the first rejection is 1/2 , and after reduction of m the probability of another rejection is 0 (one call × probability of 1/2 , plus two calls × probability of 1/2).

This result is what happens with the chosen Mersenne Twister implementation, when defining, for instance, m=231+32 on 32-bit platforms. Actually, SmartRange favors even better than the aforementioned 25 percent, probably due to more information being available to the compiler in this case; see Table 1.

Approach next()/next(max) Time
SimpleRange 1.99976 1.30s (0.53s w/inlining)
SmartRange 1.50794 0.35s

Table 1: Comparing SimpleRange with SmartRange on m = 231 + 32, with 10,000,000 iterations.


The computation of the remainder range size rem is carefully written to avoid overflows when value_t is an unsigned integer (as it is in the Random wrapper class). Mathematically, if you define m as the desired range exclusive maximum, M as the maximum number representable by value_t plus 1 (that is, making the previously used M greater by 1), and r as the remainder range size, then r=M mod m. Moreover, the GCD value that we compute in random_traits is actually:

g=gcd(m,r)=gcd(m,M mod m)=gcd(M,m)

Because on most architectures M is a power of 2 (do you know a platform on which it is not true?), g is actually 2 to the power of the number of trailing zeros in the binary representation of m. Thus, if we wish to forgo platform neutrality, the approach I present in this article might be efficient even when m is not known at compile time, especially if appropriate bit-twiddling hacks are employed (

Can REDUCE_MAX happen more than once for a single call to next(max)? The answer is no, but proving it is left as an exercise to interested readers.

Related Reading

More Insights

Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags


<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags


<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

