Reply To: Intentions behind Random function overloading
sorrry if my question was not stated properly.
There’s no doubt about using functions in general.
I just wondered wether there’s some reason to have separate function names for each return type rather one function name that is valid for all return types.
But if you say that there’s no technical reason for it and a generic Random function can/will be added in some future release that’s OK.
I just wanted to understand the intentions behind the way you did it.