Well that depends on your luck, it could be a valid one about 1/16th of the time.
reply1/64, actually, because RFC-compliant (variant 1) UUIDv4 requires fixed values for both the version nibble and two bits of the variant nibble.
replyThe fact that we're discussing this at all is a reasonable argument for using a library function.
While it might be invalid, will most libraries choke if you give them a pseudo UUIDv4?
replyNice, thanks and I agree.
replyI didn't say about 16 random bytes. But you're almost there. You generate 16 random bytes and perform few bitwise operations to set version and variant bits correctly.
replyNot that it matters. I don't even think that there's a single piece of software in the world which would actually care about these bits rather than treating the whole byte array as opaque thing.
Let's call it a valid UUIDv0 - all bits randomized including the version bits :)
replyWhat if I generate 16 random bytes and use that as id?
replyNo problem, just don't call it UUID
reply