| |
| |
| |
|
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 28
Comments:
<0> sometimes the code is TFM
<0> well, not mine, i embed POD in my code, usually :)
<1> patch posted
<2> whips the ****ing monkeys?
<2> mostly I sit around thinking of amusing acronyms!
<2> :P
<1> ZXNN - dec... go to work
<2> zealous xylophone nibbling nitwits?
<2> zebras x-ray, never noticed?
<2> zing! xmen notoriously neutered
<1> dec: you are good
<2> :)
<3> anyone remember Acrophobia?
<3> I want that game back. Let's write an opensource perl version ;)
<3> NOW.
<1> never heard of it
<2> neither.
<4> isn't acrophobia fear of great heights?
<3> Pete_I: only when used properly
<2> fear of acrobats?
<2> I quite enjoy acrobats, to be honest.
<2> wouldn't want to be one, with all that tight nylon clothing.
<3> It was an online game from Bezerk, where players were supplied with a string of letters, and had 60 seconds to come up with a phrase where the first letters of the words matched the letters given
<3> and then everyone voted on the funniest/most creative, and points were awarded
<5> lol
<5> IRC would be a good forum for it ..
<3> oh, and if two people come up with the same thing, the second person gets buzzered and has to come up with a new one in the remaining time :)
<3> Woosta: except it depends on not being able to see everyone else's until the end (or to see who wrote what)
<5> yeah .. you'd /msg the bot ..
<5> Of course if you had 30 people playing, the bot would probably flood itself off recounting them for voting
<3> yeah, I suppose.
<3> Probably better done as its own thing though :)
<3> hmm
<3> actually apparently it was originally done on IRC ;)
<1> hobbs: your mission, should you choose to accept it...
<6> hurrah, just braught a 19" LCD :-D
<7> :\
<7> I think a 12" LCD is better.
<3> nah-uh. 15" is the only size for a laptop :)
<6> mouwhaha
<6> going from 800x600 to 1200x1024 is awsome
<8> nachos: Yay
<6> simple beauty
<8> nachos: And much less desk space, I imagine (if you had a CRT before)
<6> And its such a good picture
<6> yeah i had a ugly 15" crt that had more curves than a latino dancer
<3> nachos: 1400x1050 is perfection ;)
<9> 1280x1024 please
<8> I'm quite enjoying my 1680x1050
<9> I have 1280x1024 and 1280x800 going on on my desk
<6> I dont mind.
<3> revdiablo: stupid wide screens. But I guess as long as it's x1050 it's alright
<3> revdiablo: (rather than the weaker 1440x900)
<10> Pft
<6> now i need some good wallpapers!
<10> 1400x1050 is where it's at
<6> all the ones i have are too small :-D
<8> nachos: I had to go take my own =)
<6> hehe, revdiablo.
<1> weak... 3840x1200 owns
<10> nachos: customize.org and pixelgirlpresents.com/desktops.php has some good stuff
<8> pravus: Forget that, my other display does 1023258x123210
<1> revdiablo: i just got 2 24" wides at work... i'm so happy now
<3> or just get POV-Ray and find a good scene on one of those sites
<3> and render at whatever res you like :)
<3> http://pixelgirlpresents.com/images/desktops/Emre_Sel/panda_1680_1050.jpg -- strangely cool
<11> hobbs's url is at http://xrl.us/ngip
<8> http://static.flickr.com/75/166214488_dd818fbe79_o.jpg
<8> That's my self-taken wallpaper =)
<3> revdiablo: that's well done. But you should have wiped away the crumbs ;)
<1> revdiablo: kick ***
<8> hobbs: Yeah, I noticed that too late =)
<8> I especially like the sesame seed in the bottom right
<1> it brings a sense of realism
<3> revdiablo: but a nicely composed shot nonetheless. I wonder if I could crop it to fit my screen without ruining it
<12> damn, X hung on me!
<12> i hope its not my new video card doing this
<13> Uhhhh I can't figure out how the fork() command works... would someone help me I am just learning perl and the documentation on it doesn't help me much... when I tried experimenting with it I accidentally crashed my machine....
<1> fork bomb
<14> when to use "my" and "our" when using a "use strict";
<12> int main(){ while(1){ fork(); } return 0; }
<3> fatalserpent: you call fork, and it returns twice, in two different processes
<1> perlbot coping with scoping > scherz0z
<13> but what does it return?
<3> fatalserpent: in the "child" process, it returns 0; in the "parent" it returns the process ID (pid) of the child.
<1> fatalserpent: 0 in the child, the child's pid in the parent... or undef in the "parent" if it fails
<8> scherz0z: use 'my' unless you need a global variable, then use 'our'
<13> Sooo why did it crash my computer when I used: for(1.1000){fork()};print "done";
<14> ahh ok.
<4> for(1 .. 1000)
<4> fork bomb.
<13> what's that?
<4> it forked, then the forks forked, then those forks forked
<3> fatalserpent: think about it
<1> eval: while(1) { fork(); }
<4> 1000 times...
<13> I really don't know what fork does...
<15> Killing 184 due to run time
<3> fatalserpent: the first time through the loop, you call fork. It returns twice. There are now two processes at that point, ready to start the loop the second time
<4> fatalserpentl, perldoc -q fork
<16> fatalserpent: nothing when buubot is told to do it ;)
<3> fatalserpent: the second time, each of those two processes calls fork, so you end up with 4 processes. Etc.
<4> fatalserpent, you end up creating 2**1000 processes.
<4> your cpu can't handle it.
<1> fatalserpent: fork creates a duplicate of the currently running process
<13> oh ok...
<3> fatalserpent: theoretically, if your system could handle it, you'd end up with 2^1000 (that's 107 followed by about 297 zeroes) processes :)
<1> if you are in testfork.pl... after you fork(), you have 2 testfork.pl's in memory
<1> the 2nd starts at the point right after the call to fork()
<4> hobbs, it's more than that.
<13> so what order do the forks run in?
<3> Pete_I: yeah, you're right
<16> pravus: dont both start at the exact same point, just get different return values from fork() ?
<1> fatalserpent: they run at the same time
<3> Pete_I: wait, is it?
<6> huurah
<1> immute: erm.. yes, but i meant *starts*
<8> fatalserpent: The usual idea is to have only one process do the forking, then the child processes exit when they're done, rather than forking again
<1> whereas the parent would start at the beginning of the script
<4> hobbs, yes.
<13> how do you stop the fork?
<1> immute: the parent is just continuing at that point
<3> fatalserpent: what?
<17> exit()
<13> ok...
<1> fatalserpent: you would call exit() or die() (etc...) in the child
<3> fatalserpent: keep this in your head for a moment
<1> fatalserpent: the parent is then sent the SIGCHLD signal
<3> fatalserpent: fork returns a different value in the child than it does in the parent
<3> fatalserpent: this is how you can tell which is which and do different things
<1> fatalserpent: the child will become a zombie at that point unless the parent uses wait(), waitpid(), or sets $SIG{CHLD} to 'IGNORE'
<1> if the parent has already died, init (pid 1) picks up the child and reaps it
<13> ok so fork starts excecuting commands from the place it's called?
<1> init is a bastard process
<1> fatalserpent: yes
<4> does init exist in windows?
<1> Pete_I: no
<4> i should hope not.
<3> Pete_I: not exactly :)
<1> ntldr loads the kernel and it does magical things after that
<16> fatalserpent: its not that " fork starts excecuting commands from the place it's called" its that both processes continue executing from that point
<4> for(0..4){print;} demonstrates nice
<4> forgot the fork :/
<4> is there a knife() function?
<1> there damn well should be
Return to
#perl
or
Go to some related
logs:
#php
ssh2 protocal port
perl read STDOUT
unable to lookup ubuntu via gethostbyname() grub
2.6.14 kotd SuSE
/bin/sh: can't acess tty; job control turned off
nvidia 9625 beryl linux config.h ubuntu
#javascript
edude05
grass GIS yum fedora
|
|
