Jinx wrote:
.
.
> Picking
> random numbers for a small table takes longer, because so many
> Timer1L values are rejected for being too big for the high byte, and
> it can take a second or two to complete the full number but as long
> as it's as close to random as possible it's not too important. If the
> table size was set to 30,000d (7530h) for example then it would take
> a short time to find an acceptable high byte (00 - 75) but longer to
> find numbers less than 0x31 if the high byte is 0x75
.
.
   Hi, Jinx!

   You should prove that rejecting some values, you don't
hurt randomness.
   Why do you reject them at all?
   Why not select their lower bits?

   Mike.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.