Throw that code away, seriously. You need a shuffling algorithm, not a piece of code that checks older values for duplicates. Doing it your way will end up taking longer and longer as your pool runs out. The advantage of a shuffling algorithm is that it doesn't degrade as the pool becomes smaller.
Here's a piece of code I used in answering a different question. It maintains a list of numbers and, when it returns a random one to you, it removes it from the list and decrements the count for the next random selection.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#define ERR_NO_NUM -1
#define ERR_NO_MEM -2
int myRandom (int size) {
int i, n;
static int numNums = 0;
static int *numArr = NULL;
// Initialize with a specific size.
if (size >= 0) {
if (numArr != NULL)
free (numArr);
if ((numArr = malloc (sizeof(int) * size)) == NULL)
return ERR_NO_MEM;
for (i = 0; i < size; i++)
numArr[i] = i;
numNums = size;
}
// Error if no numbers left in pool.
if (numNums == 0)
return ERR_NO_NUM;
// Get random number from pool and remove it (rnd in this
// case returns a number between 0 and numNums-1 inclusive).
n = rand() % numNums;
i = numArr[n];
numArr[n] = numArr[numNums-1];
numNums--;
if (numNums == 0) {
free (numArr);
numArr = 0;
}
return i;
}
int main (void) {
int i;
srand (time (NULL));
i = myRandom (20);
while (i >= 0) {
printf ("Number = %3d\n", i);
i = myRandom (-1);
}
printf ("Final = %3d\n", i);
return 0;
}
A sample output shows it in action:
Number = 19
Number = 10
Number = 2
Number = 15
Number = 0
Number = 6
Number = 1
Number = 3
Number = 17
Number = 14
Number = 12
Number = 18
Number = 4
Number = 9
Number = 7
Number = 8
Number = 16
Number = 5
Number = 11
Number = 13
Final = -1
Call it with a non-negative pool size and it sets up a new sequence and returns the first random value. Following that, you can call it with -1
and it will get the next random, unique number from the pool. When the pool is exhausted, it will return -1.
The other answer that contained this code has a version that can maintain multiple pools as well if you want to be able to use this function in threaded code.