does this look right

[Michaela Elise]

This compiles and still works fine on linux, can someone with windows tell me if I have it right for _WIN32

/*
 * rng.hpp
 *
 *  Created on: Mar 25, 2013
 *      Author: michaela
 */

#ifndef RNG_HPP_
#define RNG_HPP_

#ifdef __linux__
#include <stdio.h>

class rng
{
	FILE* rh;

public:
	rng()
	{
		rh = fopen("/dev/urandom", "rb");
	}

	unsigned int next()
	{
		int ans;
		fread(&ans, sizeof(int), 1, rh);
		return ans;
	}
};
#endif

#ifdef _WIN32
#include <time.h>

class rng
{
	rng()
	{
		srand(time(NULL));
	}

	unsigned int next()
	{
		return rand();
	}
};

#endif

#endif /* RNG_HPP_ */

[writetonsharma]

specific parts of the code should be conditionally compiled rather the whole class. This is going to have lots of duplicate code.

[cire]

I think I'd rather go with code that works on either. There's no reason for this to rely on O/S specific implementations.

Assuming your compiler supports C++11:

#include <random>

class rng
{
public:
    rng() : _engine(std::random_device()()) {}

    unsigned next() { return _engine() ; }

private:
    std::mt19937 _engine ;
};

If it doesn't you might consider using boost.

[Michaela Elise]

I'll take that as yes, but you recommend other ways.

I am using eclipse on ubuntu and so far cannot get c++11 to work

[Michaela Elise]

Ok, I got that working.
Thaks cire, seems to work pretty well :)