00:05 < CuBe_> I want to host multiple websites, also for people who pay for it, so not online mine
00:05 < CuBe_> not only *
00:17 < CuBe_> @eeeee: :P
00:21 < eeeee> i guess it depends on website, like you can usually host static content or simple php crap for free
00:22 < eeeee> for more advanced stuff you'll have to get some vps or a PaaS specific for your technology stack
11:55 <@matricks> minus: y0 dude
11:55 <@matricks> minus: ever setup a http connnect proxy?
11:58 <@minus> Not even once
11:58 <@matricks> k
11:58 <@minus> Only socks andvpn magic
12:00 <@minus> What are you planning
12:00 < EastByte> setting up squid isn't hard iirc
12:01 <@matricks> I've setup a jabber server, and some wifi networks etc doesn't allow communication on 5222
12:01 <@minus> Ic.  You can use BOSH too
12:02 <@minus> Or just use a tunnel too
12:02 <@minus> Bosh is xmpp over http
12:03 <@minus> Typing on phone sucks
12:03 <@matricks> but then the client has to support bosh right
12:06 < JulianAssange> use nginx or varnish
12:06 <@matricks> JulianAssange: nginx doesn't support http connect
12:07 < JulianAssange> why don't u just use ssh to make a socks proxy? (-D port)
12:07 <@matricks> JulianAssange: bitch todo on the phone
12:07 < JulianAssange> oh
12:07 < JulianAssange> probably not possible on the phone tbh
12:08 < JulianAssange> unless it's rooted, idk
12:08 <@minus> Ssh port forwarding was easy for me with connectbot
12:08 <@matricks> still a bitch to manage when you move around from network to network
12:09 < EastByte> then you should set up a vpn in general on your phone
12:09 <@matricks> perhaps yeah
12:10 <@minus> Openvpn works on Android easily?
12:10 < EastByte> ^ I had prolems setting it up
12:10 < EastByte> problems*
12:10 < EastByte> but should be easy
12:10 < EastByte> android >4.0 required
12:12 <@minus> Got 4.4
12:12 <@minus> Moto g2
12:20 < JulianAssange> help
12:20 < JulianAssange> i'm doing homework
12:20 < JulianAssange> and it has a joke i have to analyze but i don't get it
12:20 < EastByte> me too :)
12:21 < JulianAssange> Knock, knock
12:21 < JulianAssange> Who’s there?
12:21 < JulianAssange> A little old lady.
12:21 < JulianAssange> A little old lady who?
12:21 < JulianAssange> I didn’t know you could yodel.
12:21 < JulianAssange> what's the joke
12:21 <@minus> Your face
12:21 < EastByte> !
12:21 < JulianAssange> ;(
12:21 < JulianAssange> i cry every time
12:26 <@matricks> JulianAssange: HAHAHAHAH!!! <#
12:27 <@matricks> JulianAssange: best joke ever :D
12:27 < JulianAssange> no
12:27 < JulianAssange> i don't get it
12:27 < JulianAssange> ffs
12:27 < JulianAssange> fuck you matricks 
12:28 < JulianAssange> you suck
12:28 <@matricks>  A little old lady who == say that fast and it sound like a yodel
12:28 < JulianAssange> i live in australia
12:28 < JulianAssange> we don't yodel
12:28 <@matricks> I live in sweden, do you think we yodel?
12:28 < JulianAssange> yes
12:28 <@matricks> well, you are wrong :D
12:29 <@matricks> it comes from rural europe along the alps
12:29 < JulianAssange> australia isn't in europe
12:29 < JulianAssange> we left the euro a long time ago
12:30 <@matricks> it comes from the central alps and is a form of communication
12:30 <@matricks> but thats the joke
12:30 < JulianAssange> o well
12:30 < JulianAssange> i'll just skip it
12:31 < EastByte> you got the answer and just skip it?
12:31 < JulianAssange> i need to do more than just understand the joke
12:32 < EastByte> okay
12:32 < JulianAssange> i need to which "subsystem" it is, and explain how the humour is created
12:32 < EastByte> btw. teeworlds on raspberry pi 2 runs with ~5fps without graphics acceleration
12:33 <@matricks> dunno what you call jokes that are based apun things sounding the same
12:34 < JulianAssange> you're not funny
12:34 < JulianAssange> v2
12:35 <@matricks> I'm very punny
12:36 < JulianAssange> https://books.google.com.au/books?id=oqvrBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=trimmets++treacle+puddings&source=bl&ots=vN___PD_1B&sig=1SOQjqJhypgeifJiv1RHMzqNCxo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rjDfVIjoHaSxmwXFo4Bw&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=trimmets%20%20treacle%20puddings&f=false
12:36 < JulianAssange> that's the one i'm doing now
12:36 < JulianAssange> atleast i get that one
12:38 <@matricks> bah, not nearly as funny
12:38 < JulianAssange> that's why i get it :
12:38 < JulianAssange> :<
12:38 < JulianAssange> :>
12:38 < JulianAssange> https://books.google.com.au/books?id=3XBLGxvNOT4C&pg=PT51&lpg=PT51&dq=%22Is+a+buddhist+monk+refusing+an+injection+at+the+dentist%27s%22&source=bl&ots=nw8-o7bVF6&sig=oaYFBFVBcqheyEIW8FKuTVR0yTI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bDPfVNymJ4vo8AWt54K4Bg&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22Is%20a%20buddhist%20monk%20refusing%20an%20injection%20at%20the%20dentist%27s%22&f=false this is the third one, which I kind of get
12:39 <@matricks> thats the same kind of joke as the yodel one
12:41 < JulianAssange> i thought it was just a pun
12:41 < JulianAssange> medication/meditation
12:42 <@matricks> transcendal dental medication sounds like transcendental medititation
12:42 <@matricks> same with with the yodel one
12:43 <@matricks> A little old lady who == sound like a yodel
12:43 < JulianAssange> o
12:43 < JulianAssange> ok i gt it now 
12:43 < JulianAssange> i said it correctly
12:43 < JulianAssange> and it kind of sounds the same i guess
12:44 < JulianAssange> @yodel
12:44 <@matricks> AAA little old ladiiii whoooooo
12:49 < JulianAssange> b. The second example is a pun on the pronunciation of "Little old lady who", since it sounds similar to a yodel when spoken quickly.
12:49 < JulianAssange> that's what i wrote anyways
12:50 <@matricks> A little old lady who
12:55 <@minus> Matricks jodelmeister
12:56 <@matricks> you are closer to the home of the yodel
13:06 <@minus> yes, they do that here
13:08  * matricks slaps minus with a rather large ballon hammer
13:09 < JulianAssange> h-happy valentines day g-guys..
13:09  * matricks is workin'
13:09  * minus is at home after getting his wisdom teeth removed
13:09 <@minus> actually, it's weekend too
13:09 <@matricks> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTq66KIag9Y
13:09 < Nimda3> [YouTube] Title: Why should they be happy? | Rating: 5.00/5.00 | Views: 44,448
13:09 <@matricks> relevant
13:10 < JulianAssange> 14:09  * minus is at home after getting his wisdom teeth removed
13:10 < JulianAssange> i'm getting mine out in a few weeks
13:10 <@minus> hf
13:10 <@minus> how many?
13:10 < JulianAssange> bottom ones
13:10 < JulianAssange> so 2 i guess
13:10 < EastByte> awesome
13:10 <@minus> got all 4 removed
13:11 < EastByte> me too, at once
13:11 <@minus> the bottom ones had to be cracked
13:11 <@matricks> so the doctor was a cracker?
13:11 < JulianAssange> i have a meeting on monday with the guy
13:12 < JulianAssange> alright, who's buying this for me? https://i.imgur.com/SGzV4we.gifv
13:13 < EastByte> how about posting sfw only stuff here?
13:14 < JulianAssange> that is sfw
13:14 <@matricks> well, nsfw... ish..
13:14 <@matricks> it's sexual
13:14 < JulianAssange> what's the guy holding?
13:14 < JulianAssange> looks like a really thin cucumber
14:01 < JulianAssange> think i might ask to get my top wisdom teeth out too tbh
14:01 < JulianAssange> my teeth seem very tight
14:01  * matricks has braces
14:02 < JulianAssange> wat
14:02 <@matricks> rails or what they are calle
14:02 < JulianAssange> how old are you
14:02 <@matricks> called
14:02 <@matricks> 31
14:02 < JulianAssange> wot
14:02 <@matricks> got them a couple of weeks back
14:02 < JulianAssange> i had braces when i was 11
14:02 < JulianAssange> until like 13
14:02 <@matricks> never had em, and I kinda need em :)
14:02 <@matricks> I started to chew up my own teeth
14:03 < JulianAssange> lol
14:04 < JulianAssange> but i hate it because it always feels like they're somethings inbetween my teeth
14:06 <@matricks> btw, if you have missed this movie, you should see it, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHCd9YwVrCo
14:06 < Nimda3> [YouTube] Title: ‪‪Steven Seagal   The Onion Movie Trailer‬‏ | Rating: 0.00/5.00 | Views: 44,759
14:09 < JulianAssange> oo
14:09 < JulianAssange> that's where the neck thing is from
14:09 <@matricks> yah
14:10 < JulianAssange> i hope that's not a real movie btw
14:11 <@matricks> cock puncher? no
14:11 < JulianAssange> no
14:11 < JulianAssange> the onion movie
14:11 <@matricks> it's a movie
14:11 <@matricks> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0392878
14:18 < JulianAssange> gaaaaaaaaaaay
14:18 < JulianAssange> but i'm gonna watch a movie now
14:18 < JulianAssange> The Lazarus Project
14:18 < JulianAssange> it has paul "no-longer" walker in it
15:11 <@minus> didn't know there was an onion movie
15:12 <@matricks> it's nice :D
15:32 < JulianAssange> http://pastebin.com/6npEHC1x
15:32 < JulianAssange> is this good code
15:33 < JulianAssange> any suggestions?
15:33 <@matricks> never ever static in a function
15:34 <@matricks> C89?
15:34 < JulianAssange> 99
15:34 <@matricks> for(unsigned i then
15:35 < JulianAssange> why not unsigned?
15:35 <@matricks> for(unsigned i = 0; i < ....
15:35 <@matricks> etc, move the declaration of i
15:35 < JulianAssange> oh
15:35 <@matricks> static unsigned short int oPort[sizeof(ports)];
15:35 <@matricks> that line is bullshit
15:35 < JulianAssange> before of the sizeof?
15:35 <@matricks> the sizeof is bullshit
15:36 < JulianAssange> yes
15:36 <@matricks> the static. just remove that
15:36 < JulianAssange> because i can't count to 3
15:36 <@matricks> JulianAssange: because that sizeof will return 6
15:36 <@matricks> not 3
15:36 < JulianAssange> yes
15:36 < JulianAssange> because it's *sizeof(unsigned short int)
15:36 < JulianAssange> times
15:37 <@matricks> and don't return a static stack variable
15:37 <@matricks> don't do static stuff
15:37 <@matricks> in general
15:37 < JulianAssange> " address of stack memory associated with local variable"
15:37 < JulianAssange> i get that error in clang fi i don't have the static
15:37 < JulianAssange> warning*
15:37 < JulianAssange> and invalid reads in valgrind
15:38 <@matricks> yes, you shouldn't return stack variables as they go out of scope
15:38 <@matricks> what does the declaration of the function look like?
15:38 <@matricks> btw, the memset is bullshit as wlel
15:39 < JulianAssange> indeed
15:39 < JulianAssange> changed those memsets to 's'
15:39 <@matricks> that is wrong
15:39 < JulianAssange> how come?
15:39 <@matricks> memset takes number of bytes, not elements
15:39 < JulianAssange> so it is fine?
15:39 <@matricks> it's not needed
15:40 <@matricks> or do oPort[] = {0}; instead of memset
15:40 <@matricks> JulianAssange: how does the function declaration look like?
15:40 < JulianAssange>         unsigned int s = sizeof(ports) / sizeof(unsigned short int);
15:40 < JulianAssange>         unsigned int e = 0;
15:40 < JulianAssange>         unsigned short int oPort[s];
15:40 < JulianAssange>         memset(oPort, 0, s));
15:40 < JulianAssange> whoops
15:40 < JulianAssange> unsigned short int *QPS(const char *network)  {
15:42 <@matricks> can you show the complete function?
15:42 < JulianAssange> http://pastebin.com/69dr6AMs
15:43 < JulianAssange> (not updated)
15:43 <@matricks> yeah...
15:43 <@matricks> almost everything is wrong :D
15:45 <@matricks> http://pastebin.com/a5dtCnhB
15:45 <@matricks> something like that
15:46 < JulianAssange> see, that's how i have all of my other functions
15:46 < JulianAssange> in void-like methods, with returns being the end size/result whatever
16:21 < JulianAssange> the memset is required btw
16:21 < JulianAssange> well
16:21 < JulianAssange> kind of
16:34 <@matricks> JulianAssange: why?
16:41 < JulianAssange> i need all non-open ports to be set to nul
16:41 < JulianAssange> i mean
16:42 <@matricks> why?
16:42 < JulianAssange> because later it's going to be used with the string functions
16:42 < JulianAssange> which requires a nul terminator
16:43 <@matricks> erh...
16:43 <@matricks> wat
16:43 < JulianAssange> ye idk
16:43 < JulianAssange> i'm too tired to think atm
16:44 <@matricks> JulianAssange: Whats better than roses on a piano?
16:45 < JulianAssange> tulips on my organ
16:45 <@matricks> damn it
16:46 < EastByte> matricks: does {0} generate code for zeroing all elements or are the zeros copied from a readonly section?
16:46 <@matricks> EastByte: how it's done isn't specified I think
16:46 < EastByte> hm
16:46 <@matricks> EastByte: I suspect many compilers will do a memset
16:46 < heinrich5991> EastByte: will likely be the best available
16:47 <@matricks> also will depend on where you do it I guess
16:47 <@matricks> stack vs heap
16:47 < EastByte> well memset would zero all the memory even padding in structs
16:49 <@matricks> why don't do a test-case and see how it behaves? :)
16:49 < JulianAssange> i ended up just doing that variable as static 
16:49 <@matricks> NOOOOOOOO
16:49 < EastByte> YEESSS
16:49  * matricks hits JulianAssange with a stick
16:50  * minus np: Dream Theater - Only A Matter of Time
16:52 <@matricks> JulianAssange: why did you make it static?
16:53 < JulianAssange> because i don't want to malloc it
16:53 <@matricks> ... w... why did you have to malloc it?
16:53 < botnik> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipsis
16:53 < heinrich5991> EastByte: that's faster than selectively zeroing
16:53 <@matricks> what was wrong with my function? :((
16:53 < JulianAssange> ... w... why did you have to malloc it?
16:53 < botnik> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipsis
16:53 < JulianAssange> ... w... 
16:53 < botnik> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipsis
16:53 < EastByte> ._.
16:53 < botnik> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=._.
16:53 < EastByte> heinrich5991: yea, right
16:53 < JulianAssange> ...
16:53 < botnik> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipsis
16:54 < JulianAssange> i liked your function matricks but i want it to return the data
16:54 <@matricks> JulianAssange: why?
16:55 <@matricks> the function becomes dangerous as you did it
16:55 <@matricks> with side-effects
16:56 < JulianAssange> like what?
16:56 <@matricks> you can't call the function twice for an example
16:57 < JulianAssange> o
16:57 <@matricks> second call will ruin the return value of the first call
16:57 <@matricks> severe side-effect
16:58 < heinrich5991> (even if it still keeps the pointer)
16:59 < JulianAssange> i'll think about this function when i wake up
17:00 < JulianAssange> i've only ever needed to return a char pointer
17:00 < EastByte> JulianAssange: think about all the cstring format functions, how do they return "data"?
17:01 < JulianAssange> what do you mean?
17:02 < EastByte> strncpy() for example, you pass a pointer to a buffer so strcpy can store its data in it
17:02 < JulianAssange> how about i just don't return an array, but a "," seperated string
17:02 < EastByte> like matrick's version of the function
17:03 < EastByte> what?!!
17:03 < JulianAssange> :^)
17:03 < heinrich5991> JulianAssange: why not return a pre-free-d dynamic allocation
17:03 < heinrich5991> so the user doesn't have to bother
17:03 < heinrich5991> with the deallocation
17:04 < JulianAssange> what? you can do that?
17:06 <@matricks> heinrich5991: what?
17:06 < heinrich5991> matricks: /s
17:06 < JulianAssange> k
17:06 < JulianAssange> time to sleep
17:06 < JulianAssange> then i think of what i want to do
17:06 <@matricks> heinrich5991: pre-free-d dynamic allocation? is that what I think it is?
17:06 < heinrich5991> yes :)
17:06 <@matricks> heinrich5991: aka a horrible idea
17:07 < EastByte> heinrich5991: freeing the memory and using it after it?
17:07 < JulianAssange> uninitalized memory ftw
17:07 < JulianAssange> well, not really uninitalized, but whatever
17:07 < heinrich5991> yes. I know it's hard to convey a joke over the interwebs :)
17:07 < heinrich5991> and apparantly I failed
17:07 < EastByte> :p
17:08 < heinrich5991> and yes, this was about
17:08  * minus silently places a shared_ptr in the room and observes
17:09 < heinrich5991> char *strcpy_cool(const char *zero_terminated) { char *result = strdup(zero_terminated); free(result); return result; }
17:09 < heinrich5991> minus: why no unique_ptr?
17:09 < JulianAssange> kek
17:09 < heinrich5991> minus: because you like atomic instructions?
17:10 < JulianAssange> call it "memory roulette" @ that function heinrich5991 
17:10 < heinrich5991> JulianAssange: :D
17:13 <@minus> heinrich5991: what's that got to do with atomic instructions?
17:14 < heinrich5991> minus: shared_ptr needs atomic instructions to do thread-safe reference counting
17:16 < JulianAssange> matricks: your function is good actually
17:16 < JulianAssange> i will then just make a third function to do port 22,25,53
17:16 < JulianAssange> (or whatever I choose later, since 22,25,53 are just for tests)
17:44 < JulianAssange> http://pastebin.com/SB72icMg matricks 
17:44 < JulianAssange> that was the end result
17:46 < JulianAssange> i guess I could rename it a void
17:47 < JulianAssange> st", b, 2, output); <- should be 'l' instead of output
17:50 < JulianAssange> i guess i could get rid of the pointer 'b' and join use 'a', but whatever
17:51 < JulianAssange> alright but really time for sleep. cya
17:52 <@matricks> wtf
17:53 <@matricks> still, dor for( unsigned i,...
17:53 < Learath2> you could simply pass a to the function 
17:53 <@matricks> unsigned short output[sizeof(a)] = {0};
17:54 <@matricks> that line is wrong
17:54 < JulianAssange> how come?
17:54 <@matricks> yeah, you need to work on your pointer arethmetic
17:54 < JulianAssange> that's what i have it as actually Learath2 
17:54 < EastByte> sizeof() is the number of bytes, not the number of elements
17:54 <@matricks> that while-loop should be an for loop
17:55 <@matricks> the return value of MultiPortScan is wrong
17:55 < JulianAssange> no, it's meant to be while()
17:55 <@matricks> why when you are looping over an integer?
17:55 <@matricks> ARGH!
17:55 <@matricks> that code ... ARGH!@$!
17:56 < EastByte> let him take a sleep please :>
17:56 < Learath2> Wouldnt sizeof fail if the number of elements isnt known at compile time
17:56 < JulianAssange> it is known at compile time
17:56 < JulianAssange> i just can't count to 3
17:57 <@matricks> there are so many errors in that code...
17:57 <@matricks> JulianAssange: go and sleep and fix it when you wake up
17:57 < heinrich5991> Learath2: c99 can have variable-length array
17:58 < EastByte> ^ sizeof() would fail there right?
17:58 < Learath2> heinrich5991: but im not sure if sizeof would work runtime
17:58 < heinrich5991> yes it does work
17:58 < Learath2> afaik it is evaluated at compile time
18:00 < heinrich5991> yes
18:00 < heinrich5991> if it's not a variable len gth array
18:00 < EastByte> lol why does that work
18:00 < JulianAssange> btw, the function works well. j/s
18:01 < EastByte> char array[argc];
18:01 < EastByte> printf("size: %u\n", sizeof(array));
18:01 < EastByte> so sizeof() is doing stuff at runtime there?
18:03 < EastByte> "If the type of the operand is a variable length array type, the operand is evaluated; otherwise, the operand is not evaluated and the result is an integer constant."
18:03 < EastByte> okay
18:04 < Learath2> does work if its a vla
18:04 < EastByte> wondering why dynamic allocation on stack is used so rarely
18:05 < JulianAssange> ok nvm, i see what you mean about the pointer arithmetic
18:06 <@matricks> EastByte: support issues
18:07 < Learath2> [18:55:35] <@matricks> why when you are looping over an integer? 
18:08 < Learath2> what should be looped on ?
18:08 < JulianAssange> i assume he means it should be l++;, not *l++;
18:08 < JulianAssange> but idk
18:09 < JulianAssange> because the while() will just keep going until it reaches the end of the pointer, no?
18:09 <@matricks> Learath2: he loops over the pointer instead of a number
18:10 <@matricks> the output array is twice the size of the input which isn't needed
18:10 < EastByte> JulianAssange: end of the pointer?!
18:10 < EastByte> there is no boundary
18:10 <@matricks> he modifies the output while he is iterating over it for no reason
18:10 <@matricks> everything is just unnessary long and complex
18:10 < Learath2> how does it even work out at the end :D
18:11 < JulianAssange> it works
18:11 <@matricks> it "works"
18:11 < JulianAssange> :^)
18:11 <@matricks> it's just.. well.. very ugly
18:11 < Learath2> how could it "work" if he is boggling his data while iterating over it 
18:11 < EastByte> "if it works, you did something wrong"
18:11 <@matricks> you can see at the code that the programmer really doesn't know what he is doing
18:11 <@matricks> his intent isn't clear
18:12 <@matricks> unnessesary operations and wrong kind of operations
18:12 < Learath2> that return oPort seems unnecesary isnt it 
18:12 <@matricks> it's kinda luck that it works
18:12 < JulianAssange> yes Learath2 
18:12 <@matricks> Learath2: well, yes
18:12 <@matricks> Learath2: he should return e
18:12 < JulianAssange> or change it to a void
18:12 < JulianAssange> but i changed it to return e
18:13 <@matricks> and the whole while should be an for loop
18:13 < JulianAssange> whyyyy
18:13 <@matricks> and output should be the same size as a
18:13 < JulianAssange> what is wrong with the while(*pointer)
18:13 < EastByte> it's just wrong
18:14 <@matricks> that just works because the output array is twice the size of a
18:14 < Learath2> yeah if it was the same size after you go over the boundry it would be garbage but you'd keep going
18:14 <@matricks> and also, if you are looping over an pointer, do it with a for loop
18:14 < Learath2> as *l != NULL
18:14 <@matricks> for(byte *p = init; *p; p++)
18:15 <@matricks> shows the intent of the loop and contains the iterator in the loop-scope
18:15 <@matricks> variables should only live as long as they have to
18:16 < Learath2> if i were to write this it would be full of ints instead of all those specific types would that be bad ?
18:16 < JulianAssange> they're all handling port numbers, so no need for 2.14b
18:16 < EastByte> depends on the hardware you are using
18:17 < EastByte> JulianAssange: handling normal integers should be faster though
18:18 < JulianAssange> probably
18:18 < JulianAssange> unsigned short c = MultiPortScan("localhost", a, 5, output);
18:18 < JulianAssange> for(unsigned int i=0; i<c; i++) { printf("%d\n", output[i]);
18:18 < JulianAssange> }
18:18 <@matricks> http://pastebin.com/j3742EuP
18:18 < JulianAssange> http://pastebin.com/YL7XX5Mj
18:19 < EastByte> looks the same
18:19 < JulianAssange> line 20 on matricks' doesn't exist on mine
18:20 < JulianAssange> i changed it to unsigned short output[sizeof(a)/sizeof(a[0])] = {0}; however
18:20 < Learath2> matricks: unsigned count = MultiPortScan("localhost", a, 2, output); shouldnt the 2 be replaced with num
18:20 < JulianAssange> yes
18:21 <@matricks> wrote it quickly, didn't check
18:23 < JulianAssange> that while() loop, that could be used if you allocate +1 to it though, no? for a mandatory nul at the end
18:23 < JulianAssange> it wouldn't e very robust, but it would work, yes?
18:25 <@minus> JulianAssange: how about using C++? could make things easier
18:28 <@matricks> still needs to know how pointers and arrays work
18:31 < JulianAssange> this is the only time i've ever used an int array tbh
18:32 < JulianAssange> everything else has been strings
18:33 < JulianAssange> ok srsly i'm going to sleep now
18:34 < JulianAssange> but while i'm gone, take a look at the only other while() in my code: http://pastebin.com/tHTTSUTi any problems with it?
18:34 < JulianAssange> night!
18:34 < EastByte> funny guy
18:39 < fstd> 15:36:20 <        matricks@> JulianAssange: because that sizeof will return 6
18:39 < fstd> sizeof doesn't return anything, stop treating it like a function
18:40 < EastByte> ^ does it work like a function on variable length arrays?
18:40 <@matricks> fstd: returns, evaluates.. whatever :)
18:42 < fstd> it's bad enough that people keep adding redundant parenthesis to it to make it look even more like a function
18:42 < fstd> EastByte: sure it evaluates is operand if it's a VLA
18:42 < EastByte> but in definition it's still not a function?
18:42 < fstd> still a far cry from 'works like a function' because a function who is given a VLA still acts differently
18:42 <@matricks> those are usually added for clearaty
18:42 < fstd> it's a function nowhere
18:42 < EastByte> okay
18:43 < fstd> matricks: i never understand how that's any clearer, tbh
18:44 < Learath2> whats the operator precendence of sizeof ?
18:44 < fstd> when i see parens on sizeof, i first assume they're there for a reason
18:44 < fstd> Learath2: pretty high
18:44 < fstd> only () [] -> and .  bind stronger
18:44 <@matricks> fstd: sizeof MyClass * 2 just looks a bit wierd :)
18:44 < Learath2> how would sizeof x + 2 be evaluated ?
18:45 < fstd> Learath2: (sizeof x) + 2
18:45 <@matricks> syntax wise there are so many things that are fucked up in c/c++ so
18:45 < fstd> matricks: "weird" because of you being used to the parens, i think.  i think it's clearer that way
18:45 < Learath2> see i would have said sizeof(x + 2)
18:45 < fstd> Learath2: so?
18:45 <@matricks> fstd: what is worse I think is where people put const and volatile
18:46 < Learath2> having parens makes it unambiguous for everyone i think
18:46 < fstd> Learath2: having parens makes it easier to read for people who don't know their C, and more difficult to read for people who do
18:46 <@matricks> const int *
18:46 <@matricks> const int const *
18:47 <@matricks> const int * const
18:47 < fstd> matricks: but volatile makes everything magically thread-safe ;)
18:47 <@minus> you can't expect everyone to know the operator precedence by heart, it doesn't even matter in 99.9% of cases
18:47 <@matricks> that is more of a problem however
18:47 < fstd> the first two are the same...
18:47 <@minus> matricks: better than not putting const anywhere
18:47 < Learath2> const int const * const for the win
18:47 <@matricks> minus: well, the thing is that the exception is the common case which people use it
18:47 <@matricks> minus: which causes problems
18:48 <@matricks> putting volatile on the wrong thing for example causes some nice bugs
18:48 <@minus> like what
18:48 < fstd> i daresay that is quite unlikely unless the code w/o volatile depends on UB or something
18:49 <@matricks> UB?
18:49 <@matricks> oh
18:49 <@matricks> well, no
18:49 <@matricks> there are loads of threading-stuff you can do with only some volatile and atomic read and writes
18:50 <@matricks> but yeah, the memory model in c/c++ isn't well defined so to speak, but it's kinda agreed apun
18:50 < fstd> volatile isn't for threading
18:50 <@minus> what does volatile do exactly?
18:50 <@matricks> fstd: I use it for threading :)
18:50 <@matricks> minus: it forces read and writes to that variables
18:50 <@matricks> *variable
18:50 <@matricks> minus: tells the compiler that something else might read, write or react on it
18:51 <@minus> instead pf using register-cached values?
18:51 < Learath2> it makes the compiler not optimize out the continuous reads 
18:51 <@matricks> more commonly used on low-level hardware stuff
18:51 <@matricks> minus: yes
18:51 < fstd> minus: it causes access to the object in question to be performed strictly by the rules of the abstract machine
18:51 < fstd> is how the standard puts it
18:51 <@minus> but doesn't prevent cpu caching
18:51 <@matricks> minus: no :)
18:51 <@matricks> that why you need volatile + barriers todo threading more or less
18:52 <@matricks> syncs or whatever your platform calls em
18:52 <@matricks> fences
18:52 <@minus> i invalidate my L1 cache after every instruction
18:52 < fstd> only place i ever use volatile is when something is changed by an interrupt serice routine
18:53 < fstd> in threading, withj some actual synchonization in place, there's no need for it, at least AFAIK
18:53 <@matricks> fstd: you can see it in wait-free threading structures
18:53 <@matricks> think there are some in teeworlds :)
18:53 < Learath2> CJob has one
18:54 <@minus> i was looking for it recently, did not find it
18:54 <@matricks> master branch doesn't have it
18:54 < Learath2> 0.6 does maybe oy threw it out
18:55 <@matricks> fstd: https://github.com/matricks/teeworlds/blob/ressys/src/base/tl/ringbuffer.h
18:55 <@matricks> fstd: there you have some
18:55 <@matricks> fstd: the mwsr version isn't wait-free but the swsr is
18:56 <@matricks> the mwsr is mostly wait-free ;)
18:56 < fstd> but only the mwsr has volatile
18:56 < fstd> maybe i misunderstood you before
18:56 <@matricks> oh yeah, the srwr doesn't need it >.< ;D
18:56 <@matricks> just needs the barrier
18:57 <@minus> how sensible is using that stuff on android?
18:57 <@minus> and iOS?
18:57 <@matricks> well, very
18:57 <@matricks> very lightweight and quick, but there are some stuff with it that should be fixed
18:58 <@matricks> the put,write,get should be 64/128bytes big
18:58 <@minus> so you wouldn't expect any issues?
18:58 <@matricks> minus: no
18:58 <@matricks> the ringbuffers should also be aligned to 64/128
18:58 <@matricks> for some added performance :)
18:59 <@minus> alignment to cache rows, yes
18:59 <@matricks> ya
18:59  * minus knows
18:59  * minus knows it all
18:59 <@minus> hardly
18:59 <@matricks> if put,write,get is on the same cache line, well, they will compete more then they need
19:00 <@matricks> and depending on the arch this can be very bad, if archetectures that only have one cache line reserve for example
19:00  * matricks glares at the ps3
19:02 < Learath2> why are all consoles so limited on memory matricks
19:02 <@matricks> Learath2: what do you mean?
19:03 <@matricks> quick! hide the sheep!
19:03 < Learath2> Ps3 has 256mb of ram iirc 
19:03 <@matricks> 256mb ram, 256mb vram
19:04 <@matricks> wasn't that bad
19:04 <@matricks> the console is like 10 years old
19:04 <@matricks> sorry... 9
19:04 <@minus> close enough
19:05 <@matricks> how much memory did you have in your computer at home 9 years ago?
19:05 < Learath2> i was far too young to check the memory of my computer :D
19:05 <@minus> 384MB iirc
19:05 <@minus> upgraded from 128MB
19:05  * minus just ordered a second 8GB stick
19:05 <@minus> 8GB is too little!
19:06 <@matricks> Learath2: well, there is your answer, it has not a lot of memory due to the fact that it's very old :)
19:06 <@matricks> Learath2: gonna ask about the current generation next? :)
19:06 <@minus> 3.8G in use, and i'm not even running an IDE
19:06 < Learath2> matricks: didnt quite remember ps3 being that old
19:07 < Learath2> i think ps4 has 256 mb of ram too tho
19:07 <@matricks> lol, no
19:07 <@matricks> 8gb
19:07 <@matricks> which is more then most pcs
19:07 < Learath2> thought that was just vram
19:07 <@matricks> no
19:07 <@matricks> ps4 doesn't have vram
19:07 <@matricks> :)
19:08 < heinrich5991> wats vram?
19:08 <@minus> video ram
19:08 <@minus> matricks: is the ps4 better to handle than the ps3?
19:08 < Learath2> matricks: ps4 shares it all ? :D
19:08 <@matricks> Learath2: yeah, it's a unified memory system like the 360
19:08 <@matricks> minus: yup
19:09 <@minus> no more silly cell arch :D
19:09 <@matricks> Learath2: which has some really nice benefits
19:09 <@matricks> minus: the cell arch is really cool, but a bitch to work with :)
19:09 <@minus> having unified memory makes sense when the GPU is on the same die as the CPU, right?
19:09 <@matricks> minus: well, not just that
19:09 <@minus> matricks: ya
19:10 <@matricks> you can be more flexible, not as much transfers needs to happen etc
19:10 <@minus> obv yeah
19:10 <@matricks> cpu can generate stuff directly to the gpu
19:10 <@matricks> the problem current is storage media actually
19:10 < Learath2> does it make a lot of difference that the transfer time is eliminated between gpu and cpu ?
19:10 <@matricks> Learath2: a bit yes
19:11 <@matricks> PC is lagging behind _HARD_ when it comes to storage media now
19:11 <@minus> optical media slooooooooow
19:11 <@minus> and harddisks aren't much better
19:11 <@minus> are SSDs not good enough?
19:11 <@matricks> minus: speed isn't the problem
19:12 <@matricks> minus: it's the amount of storage you have
19:12 <@matricks> which is becoming the pressuring issue
19:12 <@minus> generate your high detail textures in memory then
19:12 <@matricks> the issue is delivering the game to the buyer
19:13 <@matricks> and here PC sucks ass at the moment
19:13 <@minus> downloads?
19:13 <@matricks> downloads are nice yes, but you can't rely on it
19:13 <@matricks> and you can't release on bluray, because the installbase is terrible, so you are stuck with DVDs
19:13 <@minus> well, downloading 100G isn't exactly nice either
19:13 <@matricks> hence, the problem
19:14 < EastByte> so texture generation isn't an option?
19:14 <@minus> solution: ship HDDs
19:14 <@minus> EastByte: hard to do good textures and slow, i'd say
19:14 <@matricks> EastByte: well, you need data to generate from.. and generated stuff.. well. looks generated :)
19:14 <@minus> generated stuff doesn't contain much information
19:15 < EastByte> 3d models are heavy aswell
19:15 <@matricks> there are tricks to artifically increase texture fidelity, but it kinda sucks
19:15 <@matricks> EastByte: meh kinda
19:15 <@matricks> EastByte: texture + sounds are easily a bigger problem
19:15 < EastByte> really?
19:16 <@matricks> yah
19:16 <@matricks> sound takes up a lot of space as well
19:16 <@matricks> even the 50gb blurays are kinda tight
19:16 <@matricks> we could deliver a game that takes 200gb if we just had a way to deliver it
19:17 <@matricks> with really nice textures etc
19:17 < EastByte> is the ram suitable for such textures?
19:17 <@matricks> EastByte: what do you mean?
19:18 < EastByte> is there enough space
19:18 < EastByte> or do you need to load / unload the textures all the time
19:18 <@matricks> textures are streamed always
19:18 < EastByte> huh?
19:18 < EastByte> from harddrive?
19:18 <@matricks> or disc yah
19:18 < EastByte> wow, sounds horrible slow
19:19 <@matricks> all games does it more or less
19:19 <@matricks> like the textures in rage/wolfenstein.. the texture for the levels are usually 128kx128k
19:19 <@minus> in tiles?
19:19 <@matricks> in pixels
19:19 <@minus> i mean, divided into tiles on disc?
19:19 <@matricks> into pages on disc yes
19:20 <@matricks> one of those textures.. raw, in memory would be roughly 300gb
19:21 <@minus> either i just made a mistake or that's 45G of uncompressed image data
19:21 <@matricks> minus: that is correct
19:21 <@minus> (24bit)
19:21 <@minus> sweet baby jesus
19:22 <@matricks> and we could easilly generate bigger ones :)
19:22 <@minus> "generate"
19:22 <@matricks> but.. well, no way of delivering that one
19:22 < EastByte> you generate them to store them afterwards? :D
19:23 <@minus> ffffffffff
19:23 <@minus> i want to brush my teeth
19:23 <@matricks> the texture is created by a lot of other textures, so during development we render the big 128kx128k using the source textures.. and during that process we scrap a lot of texture data to fit
19:23 <@matricks> the full resolution of the source data isn't used
19:24 <@minus> do you have a SAN?
19:24 < Learath2> matricks: couldnt you ship a readonly usb or smth ? :D
19:24 <@matricks> Learath2: costs to much
19:24 <@matricks> *too
19:24 <@matricks> minus: dunno, loads of storage at work, thats for sure
19:24 <@minus> that'd like double the price, Learath2
19:25 < Learath2> generate the textures at install time ? 
19:25 <@matricks> Learath2: lol, no
19:25 <@matricks> Learath2: the source material is even bigger
19:25 <@matricks> thats several terabytes of data
19:26 <@minus> terror bites
19:26 < EastByte> matricks: have you faith in new stuff like this? http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/178166-1tb-per-disc-sony-and-panasonic-team-up-on-next-gen-blu-ray
19:26 < Learath2> felt stupid i assumed it was some kind of algorithm generating the textures
19:27 <@matricks> EastByte: well...
19:28 <@matricks> EastByte: thats like 8 years away...
19:28 <@minus> just ship on HDDs
19:29 < Learath2> Hdds are cheaper per gb arent they ?
19:29 <@matricks> yah, still not cheap
19:30 < Learath2> 0.03$ per gb and thats considering you arent buying in bulk how is that expensive ?
19:31 <@matricks> moar like 0.04$, problem is that you can't get a drive that is 100gb :)
19:32 <@matricks> to get those cheap prices per gb, you have to go up to >3TB discs
19:33 < Learath2> tell seagate that X game studio will buy around 3 million 100gb hdds from you theyd prolly consider that
19:33 <@matricks> don't think they can make em that cheap
19:33 <@matricks> it doesn't scale like that
19:33 <@matricks> there is a fixed cost for the circut boards etc
19:33 <@matricks> motors
19:34 < Learath2> how much is a bluray ?
19:34 <@matricks> next to nothing :)
19:35 <@matricks> discs you can buy is like 0.6$ USD
19:36 < Learath2> Ship on 3 blurays 
19:36 <@matricks> Learath2: on consoles, sure.. and on pc?
19:36 <@matricks> thats the problem.. pc users
19:36 <@matricks> they don't have bluray, stuck to release on DVDs
19:37 < Learath2> didnt know many didnt upgrade to bluray i indeed did upgrade to bluray
19:37 < Learath2> well if every game studio releases only on bluray and download would people give up playing games ?
19:38 <@matricks> you go a head and make that step :)
19:38 <@matricks> hmm.. steam hw survay doesn't list optical drives :/
19:38 < Learath2> Learath inc. is now releasing games in blu ray !!!
19:38 < chsk> it does
19:38 < chsk> it doesn't recognize bluray though
19:38 <@minus> hey chsk
19:38 < chsk> o/
19:39 <@matricks> chsk: huh?
19:39 <@minus> how's it going
19:39 < chsk> http://puu.sh/fUJG1/02f1891cb4.jpg
19:39 <@matricks> oh.. if I check windows only it does
19:39 <@matricks> ahh
19:39 <@matricks> so. if you are lucky.. 14%? :D
19:39 < chsk> way worse
19:39 < Learath2> undetermined is prolly bluray :D
19:40 < chsk> people that take the survey usually are the more competent pc users
19:41 < chsk> and it doesn't include chinese users at all
19:41 <@minus> actually it does ask
19:41 <@minus> i just started steam and it's asking me to take the survey
19:42 <@matricks> that reminds me, I should play some games
19:42 < chsk> 8gb is the standard then?
19:42 <@matricks> ish, or less
19:42 < chsk> also wow valve went full-retard with their recent dota event
19:42 <@matricks> huh?
19:42 <@minus> oh, i have the most prominent graphics card
19:43 <@matricks> minus: that is most likely :D
19:43 <@minus> hm actually no, i have the HD 4400
19:43 < Learath2> matricks: still hon?
19:43 <@matricks> some times
19:43 < chsk> basically there's this special variation of the usual game mode that can only be queued for within 10-minute windows that are announced an hour before
19:43 < chsk> so far, whenever they did that (every 4 hours), their network died
19:43 <@minus> :D
19:44 < Learath2> what were they expecting :D
19:44 <@matricks> well, I'm gonna try this game out now
19:45 < Learath2> matricks: what are you trying out ?
19:45 <@matricks> This war of mine
19:45 < chsk> also, there's a bunch of games that were never distributing physically, and they sold successfully
19:46 <@matricks> chsk: yes, but they are probably a lot less then a 50gb download :)
19:46 < chsk> correct
19:46 <@minus> matricks: are you coming to germany during the easter weekend?
19:46 <@matricks> minus: don't think so :D
19:46 < chsk> although i liked that i could download wolfenstein instead of buying 4 dvds.
19:46 <@minus> :P
19:47 <@matricks> chsk: you still had to download like 10gb more
19:47 < chsk> even with those dvds?
19:47 <@matricks> yah
19:48 <@matricks> too much data
19:48 < chsk> tbh i had to download a day 1 patch anyway
19:48 <@minus> 10 gigs.. takes like 3-4 hours
19:48 < chsk> wot
19:48 <@matricks> now, gaming
19:48 <@minus> hf
19:48  * minus np: Marcel Donné - Knucklebusters
19:48 < chsk> where do you live
19:48 < chsk> :v
19:48 <@minus> god damn this tune is annoying
19:49 <@minus> ok, let's say 2 hours
19:49 < chsk> would be half an hour for me
19:50 < Learath2> 10g for me is around 5 hours on a good day
19:50  * minus np: Jonathan Coulton and GlaDOS - 12 - Still Alive
19:50 <@minus> better \o/
19:50 < chsk> how do i np spotify
19:50 < chsk> from remote irssi
19:51 <@minus> write a script that does dbus magic
19:51 < Learath2> When the science is done and you make a neat gun for the people who are still alive :)
19:51 < chsk> spotify on windows*
19:51 <@minus> either with some serious magic or just do it like make, make it copy to clipboard
19:51 <@minus> ouch
19:52 < chsk> o, xposed for 5.0
19:52 < chsk> cool