You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm not sure I'm a fan of adding a spec that only passes probabilistically. I feel like it's probably fairly easy to manually verify that a random() function actually produces different numbers in a fairly random way, and users aren't going to be using this for anything security-related so I don't think there's a pressing need to verify it with a high degree of certainty.
I agree that this is not a test about anything security related, but I had made an error about random(2) that was not catched by any spec test, and I'm pretty sure we already have similar probabilistic test for random already.
The existing random() tests are only probabilistic if the random() function is behaving incorrectly. If it's behaving correctly, they're guaranteed to pass.
Not sure we have such a spec test yet, if so please ignore.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: