From: porkchop@invalid.foo   
      
   On Mon, 22 Dec 2025 06:44:42 -0500, James Kuyper wrote:   
      
   > On 2025-12-22 03:48, Michael Sanders wrote:   
   >> Is it incorrect to use 0 (zero) to seed srand()?   
   >>   
   >> int seed = (argc >= 2 && strlen(argv[1]) == 9)   
   >>            ? atoi(argv[1])   
   >>            : (int)(time(NULL) % 900000000 + 100000000);   
   >>   
   >> srand(seed);   
   >   
   > No, why whould you think so?   
      
   Excuse my delayed reply James (net provider was down most of today).   
      
   Well, I guess I did not expect such large differences between   
   gcc & musl somehow (cant test with clang just yet). I understand the   
   sequence is deterministic & likely still some differences with musl,   
   yet I wrongly assumed it seems, the sequences would be the same...   
      
   #include    
   #include    
      
   int main(void) {   
       srand(0);   
       printf("%d\n", rand());   
       return 0;   
   }   
      
   /*   
      
   $ gcc -O2 -o rnd rnd.c && ./rnd   
   1804289383   
      
   $ musl-gcc -static -O2 -o rnd rnd.c && ./rnd   
   2049033599   
      
   */   
      
   --   
   :wq   
   Mike Sanders   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)