问题
I've seen a lot of code where random numbers are generated like
// random integers in the interval [1, 10]
Math.floor(Math.random()*10 + 1)
Anyway, I feel like I'm missing something. Why don't people use the more succint way
Math.ceil(Math.random()*10);
?
I tried to test the randomness and it seems true so far.
In fact, the subsequent code
// will generate random integers from 1 to 4
var frequencies = [ 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 ]; // not using the first place
var randomNumber;
for ( var i = 0; i < 1*1000*1000; ++i ) {
randomNumber = Math.ceil(Math.random()*4);
frequencies[randomNumber]++;
}
for ( var i = 1; i <= 4; ++i ) {
console.log(i +": "+ frequencies[i]);
}
prints out
1: 250103
2: 250161
3: 250163
4: 249573
What am I missing?
Quick OT: Is there a more succint way to declare and initialize frequencies? I mean like frequencies[5] = { 0 }; from C++...
回答1:
as stated in MDN reference about Math.random()
Returns a floating-point, pseudo-random number in the range [0, 1) that is, from 0 (inclusive) up to but not including 1 (exclusive), which you can then scale to your desired range.
Since Math.random can return 0, then Math.ceil(Math.random()*10) could also return 0 and that value is out of your [1..10] range.
About your second question, see Most efficient way to create a zero filled JavaScript array?
回答2:
Math.floor() is preferred here because of the range of Math.random().
For instance, Math.random() * 10 gives a range of [0, 10). Using Math.floor() you will never get to the value of 10, whereas Math.ceil() may give 0.
回答3:
random integers in the interval [1, 10]:
Math.floor(Math.random()*10 + 1)
random integers in the interval [0, 10]:
Math.ceil(Math.random()*10);
Just depends what you need.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/15830658/random-number-math-floor-vs-math-ceil