| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Comments:
<0> It gets too big?
<1> B0at: I don't know what "too big" is... since it works fine on another Machine, same code (although, their Perl version is a little older).
<0> I'm asking about the symptoms, not the cause
<0> Your qwords aren't big enough! Get new ones!
<2> B0AT
<1> I'm supposing it gets too big.
<2> COME AWAY WITH ME.
<0> I hate that song
<2> What song?
<0> "Come Sail Away"
<2> Never heard it.
<0> Count yourself among the fortunate, my son.
<2> Ok!
<2> I've got my evil all set up.
<1> B0at: $x**8 doesn't produce the excess lines, but any exponent greater than 8 does. And anything greater than 6 in: 6**$x also does the same thing.
<0> Besides BigInt, I don't know squat about getting around such limitations
<0> It's giving me flashbacks of languages that made you care about different types of integers
<0> And woe are the floats
<3> given a list of integers, (unix times, in this case), what's the best way to find "holes" in the sequence?
<3> monotonically increasing integers
<3> like 100 105 106 107 -> 101-104
<4> answer seems too simple for you to be asking the right question :)
<1> B0at: Even after removing all scientific notation values (BigInt is simply more precise, right? So, that's the only advantage I'd get from it in this, right?), the problem still persists.
<4> no
<4> BigInt is to support arbitrarily large numbers
<1> Khisanth: Right... but in my case, is there more of an advantage working towards me than simply removing values that end up as scientific notation to be graphed?
<5> buu: I find your lack of knowledge of Styx disturbing
<6> mr roboto?
<5> Capso: say that again, but as an english sentence that makes some sense. :)
<7> hobbs, I find your knowledge of styx disturbing
<2> It's happy.
<2> Yay happiness!
<8> hi
<8> i have a problem with MLDBM. tie'ing a hash with O_SYNC flag doesnt switch autosync on bdb. how this can be done?
<8> sure, i can do $bdb->sync() everytime i do something with tied hash, but it is boring...
<9> *YAWN*
<10> Using DBI, how can I grab the contents of an entire table? I have tried fetchrow_array and looping through the rows, but I am displaying it in a curses window, and I don't want to have a lot of dialog windows. Should I be putting it into a hash?
<11> use DBIx::Simple; ... $db->query("SELECT * from FOOTABLE)->hash;
<6> Stuartw: perldoc DBI says there is a fetchall_arrayref() ?
<10> I believe so.
<10> It returns a reference to an array of references.
<1> Hobbs: Right... but in my case, is there more of an advantage working towards me than simply removing values that end up as scientific notation to be graphed? :)
<12> whats the difference between hex shell code and regular shell code?
<5> nanotech: **** off
<12> hrm?
<6> this is not the forum for that sort of thing
<13> haha hobbs, best reply ever, especially from someone usually as laidback as you
<5> zshzn: I'm only laid back when I wanna be ;)
<14> how do i make unsigned long overflow, so that 0xffffffff + 1 == 0, not 0xffffffff
<6> nanotech: go build a microscopic bridge or something useful
<12> heh
<12> that would be ... hard
<12> ; )
<5> rdancer: perl isn't C. You don't get unsigned longs, you get numbers. What are you really after here?
<12> hobbs stop being so paranoid ; )
<14> hobbs: i need the result of adding two 32-bit integers, with overflow
<5> It's not paranoia if they're really after you
<6> damnit. i say that all the time.
<15> rdancer: Why do you need that?
<16> nanotech: he's right, we aren't here to help skript idiots try to understand the toys they currently use by magic
<5> rdancer: well, that's sort of inherently tricky because of the way perl "promotes" numbers
<14> Brend: http://vortex.labs.pulltheplug.org/
<6> doesn't perl adhere to the architectures definition of an integer?
<15> perl doesn't even have integers
<14> i get challenge, and have to reply with reply, which is what i've said above
<5> rdancer: in fact I can't exactly think of a way to do it short of using a multiprecision math library or XS code
<6> well, but for overflow, etc
<16> pravus: who said anything about integers - numbers in perl can be ints or floating point
<12> ; )
<5> pravus: no, if you do math that would overflow a native int the number gets promoted to a float instead
<6> hrm
<6> perl is a love/hate relationship
<16> bit twiddling just ain't what it's best at
<14> really can't be done easily? how do ppl use perl in writing exploits then?
<13> heh
<5> rdancer: what the **** is with you people today?
<16> rdancer: dunno, ask nanotech
<6> why are there always clusters of them?
<13> hahaha
<13> I love you guys
<6> it's never just one random ***
<14> that was a constructive question
<16> "they run in packs" is the usual phrase
<12> llol
<12> well
<12> exploiting coding is still coding
<12> just of another sort
<12> it does have legitimate uses
<5> either that or they have lots of BNCs and multiple personality disorder
<12> so would if rdancer is a colleg student
<16> not really
<6> it's generally frowned upon as well
<12> tryin to learn some new stuff
<12> and you guys are being ***'s to him
<12> ; )
<6> if you find a 'sploit, report it to the author(s) and follow standard procedures for notification, etc...
<12> pravus ?
<14> it's just about how nanotech said
<12> if that was the case alot of IT/coders wouldnt have jobs
<16> wtf
<12> i m not defending him, im just saying keep an open mind
<6> what? virus scanner programmers?
<12> ; \
<5> rdancer: learn about appropriate tools. C isn't an appropriate tool for bit-bashing.
<16> "creating jobs"? is that the latest justification for doing that crap?
<14> hobbs: what is?
<12> ?
<12> wtf
<5> rdancer: C
<12> if that was the case
<12> a coder would make a program
<12> and htat wold be it
<6> rdancer, nanotech: face it... you came to the wrong place for exploit sympathizers
<13> nanotech/etc, ask people that do this kind of thing, in those kind of places. what applies to writing exploits in C applies to writing exploits in Perl. this channel obviously isn't going to work out for you now
<12> you wouldnt be needed anymore
<5> nanotech: holy leaps of logic, batman
<6> heh
<16> maybe he should ask in #c
<13> I claim the points for that exit!
<16> I hear they're real friendly down there
<6> perhaps he got hit by an exploit?
<5> pravus: I was thinking that
<5> pravus: could be one of those faulty routers :)
<6> zomg i can't even believe that crap. been kinda quiet today though
<12> ?
<12> i m just saying
<16> geez, he's back for more
<12> if it wasnt for people like rdancer
<6> maybe they have been k-lined or something
<12> then alot of coders wouldnt have jobs
<14> not that i really cared, but what exactly you guys have against security research i don't get
<12> and definently wouldnt be a need for to many IT and system administrators
<6> nanotech: you have no basis to support you claim. there are a *lot* of reasons coders have jobs
<16> nanotech: your reasoning, and I use that term loosely, doesn't seem to follow a straight line from one end to the other
<6> exploits only supply a portion of the work force
<6> a *small* portion of the work force
<12> yeah
<12> and what is the other portion pravus?
<6> rdancer: i don't have anything against it. this is not the place to ask questions about it.
<16> I've done it but only incidentally to what I really do in life
<6> nanotech: troll elsewhere. that's a ludicrous statement.
<12> no
<12> its not ; )
<6> you are biased
<12> why would a company pay a system admin 100k/year
<12> just to sit and do ****?
<16> yes
<16> exactly for that reason
Return to
#perl
or
Go to some related
logs:
#awk
#python
#ubuntu
+bittorent-gui +font
awk merge 2 files
lobstu
multiprosser acpi
#linux
milkdrop ubuntu
ipw2100 device eth1 does not exist
|
|