added random_device to intarray.cpp

[malcolmk181]

No description provided.

[seunomonije]

Good pr. see notes

[seunomonije]

Move std::random device outside of the loop, calling it multiple times is redundant.

[seunomonije]

See here for an example of it being used. Otp we discussed and I read up some more on it.
std::random_device can fail

• On construction, ie std::random_device [name], throwing an exception and exiting the whole program if left uncaught.
• Or when requesting a random number, ie rd() % 2. Currently your code would catch this and use srand() in the same spot.

I think you have 2 options here. One is the easy way out and the other is more proper/more involved, but whichever you want to do is fine with me:

• For our purposes it's fine if the whole program exits with an exception if std::random_device fails.
• Possibly, a better way to construct this is to have 2 separate classes, one IntArraySrand and IntArrayRandDevice or something like that, and in a parent class IntArray attempt to build the array using IntArrayRandDevice and if that fails, build it using IntArraySrand. This way you could have std::random_device contained within the IntArrayRandDevice class and so if it fails when constructing the class you know you can't use it anymore.

[nsnave]

The second option using the classes would also allow for easier reuse later; notably, being able to combine the generators in different ways for different purposes that appeal better to the different rngs' strengths.

[seunomonije]

Try catch rather than actually checking for errors? EDIT: I actually like the try catch. See above.

[seunomonije]

See here for an example of it being used. Otp we discussed and I read up some more on it.
std::random_device can fail

• On construction, ie std::random_device [name], throwing an exception and exiting the whole program if left uncaught.
• Or when requesting a random number, ie rd() % 2. Currently your code would catch this and use srand() in the same spot.

I think you have 2 options here. One is the easy way out and the other is more proper/more involved, but whichever you want to do is fine with me:

• For our purposes it's fine if the whole program exits with an exception if std::random_device fails.
• Possibly, a better way to construct this is to have 2 separate classes, one IntArraySrand and IntArrayRandDevice or something like that, and in a parent class IntArray attempt to build the array using IntArrayRandDevice and if that fails, build it using IntArraySrand. This way you could have std::random_device contained within the IntArrayRandDevice class and so if it fails when constructing the class you know you can't use it anymore.