Here is a solution that tries to minimize the number of calls to rand5() while keeping the implementation simple and efficient; in particular, it does not require arbitrary large integers unlike Adam Rosenfield’s second answer. It exploits the fact that 23/19 = 1.21052... is a good rational approximation to log(7)/log(5) = 1.20906..., thus we can generate 19 random elements of {1,...,7} out of 23 random elements of {1,...,5} by rejection sampling with only a small rejection probability. On average, the algorithm below takes about 1.266 calls to rand5() for each call to rand7(). If the distribution of rand5() is uniform, so is rand7().

uint_fast64_t pool;

int capacity = 0;

void new_batch (void)
{
  uint_fast64_t r;
  int i;

  do {
    r = 0;
    for (i = 0; i < 23; i++)
      r = 5 * r + (rand5() - 1);
  } while (r >= 11398895185373143ULL);  /* 7**19, a bit less than 5**23 */

  pool = r;
  capacity = 19;
}

int rand7 (void)
{
  int r;

  if (capacity == 0)
    new_batch();

  r = pool % 7;
  pool /= 7;
  capacity--;

  return r + 1;
}

rand7() = (rand5()+rand5()+rand5()+rand5()+rand5()+rand5()+rand5())%7+1

编辑:这并不奏效。误差约为千分之二(假设是完美的rand5)。桶得到:

value   Count  Error%
1       11158  -0.0035
2       11144  -0.0214
3       11144  -0.0214
4       11158  -0.0035
5       11172  +0.0144
6       11177  +0.0208
7       11172  +0.0144

通过转换到的和

n   Error%
10  +/- 1e-3,
12  +/- 1e-4,
14  +/- 1e-5,
16  +/- 1e-6,
...
28  +/- 3e-11

似乎每增加2就增加一个数量级

BTW:上面的误差表不是通过采样产生的，而是通过以下递归关系产生的:

P [x,n]是给定n次调用rand5，输出=x可能发生的次数。

  p[1,1] ... p[5,1] = 1
  p[6,1] ... p[7,1] = 0

  p[1,n] = p[7,n-1] + p[6,n-1] + p[5,n-1] + p[4,n-1] + p[3,n-1]
  p[2,n] = p[1,n-1] + p[7,n-1] + p[6,n-1] + p[5,n-1] + p[4,n-1]
  p[3,n] = p[2,n-1] + p[1,n-1] + p[7,n-1] + p[6,n-1] + p[5,n-1]
  p[4,n] = p[3,n-1] + p[2,n-1] + p[1,n-1] + p[7,n-1] + p[6,n-1]
  p[5,n] = p[4,n-1] + p[3,n-1] + p[2,n-1] + p[1,n-1] + p[7,n-1]
  p[6,n] = p[5,n-1] + p[4,n-1] + p[3,n-1] + p[2,n-1] + p[1,n-1]
  p[7,n] = p[6,n-1] + p[5,n-1] + p[4,n-1] + p[3,n-1] + p[2,n-1]

int ans = 0;
while (ans == 0) 
{
     for (int i=0; i<3; i++) 
     {
          while ((r = rand5()) == 3){};
          ans += (r < 3) >> i
     }
}

我玩了一下，我为这个Rand(7)算法写了“测试环境”。例如，如果你想尝试哪种分布给你的算法，或者需要多少次迭代才能生成所有不同的随机值(对于Rand(7) 1-7)，你可以使用它。

我的核心算法是:

return (Rand5() + Rand5()) % 7 + 1;

和亚当·罗森菲尔德的分布一样均匀。(我将其包含在代码片段中)

private static int Rand7WithRand5()
{
    //PUT YOU FAVOURITE ALGORITHM HERE//

    //1. Stackoverflow winner
    int i;
    do
    {
        i = 5 * (Rand5() - 1) + Rand5(); // i is now uniformly random between 1 and 25
    } while (i > 21);
    // i is now uniformly random between 1 and 21
    return i % 7 + 1;

    //My 2 cents
    //return (Rand5() + Rand5()) % 7 + 1;
}

这个“测试环境”可以采用任何Rand(n)算法并测试和评估它(分布和速度)。只需将代码放入“Rand7WithRand5”方法并运行代码片段。

一些观察:

亚当·罗森菲尔德(Adam Rosenfield)的算法并不比我的算法分布得更好。不管怎样，两种算法的分布都很糟糕。 本机Rand7(随机的。Next(1,8))完成，因为它在大约200+迭代中生成了给定间隔内的所有成员，Rand7WithRand5算法的顺序为10k(约30-70k) 真正的挑战不是编写从Rand(5)生成Rand(7)的方法，而是生成几乎均匀分布的值。

因为1/7是一个以5为底的无限小数，所以没有(完全正确的)解可以在常数时间内运行。一个简单的解决方案是使用拒绝抽样，例如:

int i;
do
{
  i = 5 * (rand5() - 1) + rand5();  // i is now uniformly random between 1 and 25
} while(i > 21);
// i is now uniformly random between 1 and 21
return i % 7 + 1;  // result is now uniformly random between 1 and 7

这个循环的预期运行时间为25/21 = 1.19次迭代，但是永远循环的概率非常小。

PHP解决方案

<?php
function random_5(){
    return rand(1,5);
}


function random_7(){
 $total = 0;

    for($i=0;$i<7;$i++){
        $total += random_5();
    }

    return ($total%7)+1; 
}

echo random_7();
?>