Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Should be passing an RNG here, not just a seed #260

Closed
odunbar opened this issue Mar 17, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #281
Closed

Should be passing an RNG here, not just a seed #260

odunbar opened this issue Mar 17, 2023 · 1 comment · Fixed by #281

Comments

@odunbar
Copy link
Collaborator

odunbar commented Mar 17, 2023

rng_seed::Union{IT, Nothing} = nothing,

Just noticed that we pass in a seed here, this should be passing around an rng::AbstractRNG so users can use more stable options than Random.seed!().

In particular we should be writing functions that take in
function f(..., rng::RNG) where {RNG <: AbstractRNG}
Or have a keyword with default
function f(..., rng = Random.default_rng())

and the rng should be stored in the ekp object.

This will make randomness far more traceable in our code.

@costachris
Copy link
Member

Will be addressed in #281

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants