> > >While we throw away up to 3 random numbers each time we ask for a single
> > >random number, we're always going to have a minimum gap of approximately
> > >1/3rd the theoretical gap.
> > 
> > Its enough to make you weep. Well, me anyway.
> > 
> > There's an English proverb: ``once bitten, twice shy'', and a similar
> > US phrase: ``fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me''.
> > OpenBSD code in general, and this code in specific, is well into 
> > ``shame on me'' territory -- at least for me.
> 
> 	the documentation problem (let you believe the cycle was 36000 instead
> 	of 12000) was completely my responsibility.  do not blame OpenBSD
> 	for that.  blame ME.

	and i probably mislead you to believe that the cycle is 36000 during
	the discussion in the past.  if so, apologies.

itojun