11:25 < JulianAssange> sizeof(var) vs sizeof var
11:26 < JulianAssange> what is difference
11:27 < Learath2> in C sizeof is a operator which makes the first one bad syntax iirc
11:27 < LittleWhite> none as far as I remember
11:27 < Learath2> ofc they work the same :D
11:28 < LittleWhite> Learath2: In C ANSI, maybe ?
11:28 < LittleWhite> but now, there is no problem ?
11:29 < LittleWhite> Learath2: You ae right
11:29 < LittleWhite> in C, sizeof int does not compile at all
11:30 < Learath2> doesnt ??
11:30 < LittleWhite> test.cpp: In function ‘int main()’:
11:30 < LittleWhite> test.cpp:5:30: erreur: expected primary-expression before ‘int’
11:30 < LittleWhite>   printf("Size : %d\n",sizeof int);
11:30 < JulianAssange> that will be 4
11:30 < JulianAssange> or 8 on 64-bit
11:30 < JulianAssange> i believe 
11:31 < JulianAssange> oh
11:31 < JulianAssange> i should have read above
11:31 < LittleWhite> JulianAssange: 4 even in 64 bits 
11:31 < LittleWhite> int, does not change size between arch
11:31 < JulianAssange> ok
11:33 < JulianAssange>                         char *p = malloc(21);
11:33 < JulianAssange>                         memset(p, 0, 21);
11:33 < JulianAssange> that's the reason i ask
11:33 < JulianAssange> i think i might need to do  sizeof(char *) * 21
11:33 < JulianAssange> not just 21
11:33 < EastByte> sizeof(char *)?
11:33 < EastByte> doesn't make sense
11:34 < JulianAssange> sizeof(char)?
11:34 < EastByte> I guess you want to alloc a buffer of size 21?
11:34 < JulianAssange> yes
11:34 < EastByte> otherwise memset doesn't make sense
11:34 < EastByte> yea, then sizeof(char)*21
11:34 < JulianAssange> 20 characters + 1 nul
11:34 < EastByte> which is 21
11:34 < JulianAssange> ok
11:36 < Learath2> C99 6.5.3 says that its either sizeof (type-name) or sizeof unary-expression
11:36 < Learath2> so typenames need to be paranthesised :P
11:37 < JulianAssange> i guess for readability sizeof(*p)*21 is better
11:38 < JulianAssange> or, as you discussed, 21 * sizeof *p
11:38 < Learath2> i'd use the second but thats just me :P
11:39 < EastByte> usually you don't alloc dynamic sized buffers
11:39 < EastByte> and for static sized buffer you can simply us sizeof(var)
11:39 < EastByte> use*
11:40 < JulianAssange> hm
11:40 < JulianAssange> i can't remember why i used malloc for this
11:41 < JulianAssange> oh
11:41 < JulianAssange> it needs to be a pointer later on in the code
11:41 < EastByte> char buf[256];
11:41 < EastByte> buf is a pointer aswell
11:41 < JulianAssange> you can't use pointer arithmetic on it though, no?
11:41 < EastByte> sure you can
11:42 < EastByte> well, changing its address isn't a good idea
11:42 < JulianAssange> ^
11:42 < JulianAssange> NetworkFunctions.c:345:7: error: cannot increment value of type 'char [21]' p++;
11:42 < EastByte> rather do char *p = buf+...
11:43 < EastByte> ^ indeed that doesn't work
11:43 < JulianAssange> that's why i need it
11:44 < Learath2> char *p = &buf + 
11:44 < EastByte> buf already is a pointer :/
11:44 < Learath2> no it isnt
11:44 < Learath2> its an array
11:44 < EastByte> grr
11:44 < Learath2> only when passed as an argument arrays are passed by referance
11:45 < EastByte> *buf will derefence to it's first char
11:45 < EastByte> &buf is a pointer to a pointer to the first char
11:45 < Learath2> then im just mad 
11:45 < JulianAssange> you can't do pointer arithmetic on references
11:45 < JulianAssange> iirc
11:45 < EastByte> you don't even have references in C
11:46 < JulianAssange> you have pseudo references
11:46 < EastByte> yea
11:46 < EastByte> so char buf[21];
11:46 < EastByte> char *p = buf+...
11:46 < EastByte> would be the right way
11:46 < JulianAssange> yeah
11:46 < EastByte> the buffer even is allocated on stack
11:48 < Learath2> i bet char *p = buf; p += 1; would work :P
11:48 < EastByte> yep
11:49 < EastByte> also remember that p+=1 actually is p+=sizeof(char)
11:49 < EastByte> so it'll be different on integer pointers
11:50 < EastByte> int *i = NULL;
11:50 < EastByte> printf("%p %p\n", i, i+1);
11:50 < EastByte> output: 0x0 and 0x4
11:51 < JulianAssange> ok
11:51 < JulianAssange> well i'm going to go do weights so bbl
11:51 < EastByte> cya
12:14 < heinrich5991> EastByte: that's not correct, &buf is a pointer to the array
12:14 < heinrich5991> buf is coerced to be &buf[0] though, that's correct
12:16 < EastByte> okay, I see
12:17 < EastByte> Learath2: I was kinda wrong
12:44 <@matricks> why not convert teeworlds to javascript? it seem in at the moment
12:46 < JulianAssange> convert it to D
12:47 <@matricks> I would prefer rust
12:48 < JulianAssange> how about asm?
12:48 <@matricks> pcode?
12:48 < JulianAssange> no.
12:49 < heinrich5991> how about rust executing pcode? :)
12:49 < JulianAssange> how about we just make an IRL teeworlds
12:49 < heinrich5991> best of all worlds
12:49 <@matricks> but I've actually toyed with the idea to on how you would convert teeworlds to rust
12:49 < heinrich5991> convert or rewrite?
12:50 <@matricks> convert
12:50 < heinrich5991> gradually replacing parts with rust code?
12:50 <@matricks> yup
12:50 <@matricks> teeworlds has 4 very well separated parts.. take one of the parts and convert it :)
12:50 < heinrich5991> :) which ones? network - engine - game - ?
12:51 <@matricks> client/server, engine/game
12:51 <@matricks> so, perhaps take engine server and convert it first
12:51 < JulianAssange> write it in fourtran
12:52 <@matricks> said the man who can't even spell it
12:52 < JulianAssange> hey hey
12:52 < JulianAssange> when i first learnt about it
12:52 < JulianAssange> i thought it was a 4chan for trannies
12:52 < JulianAssange> fortran, then
12:53 <@matricks> but I was semi serious about the rust thing
12:53 <@matricks> on that I've thought about it
12:53 < heinrich5991> matricks: there's still the interesting problem to solve for implementing it in Rust
12:53 < heinrich5991> the back-references that everybody has
12:53 <@matricks> yup
12:54 < heinrich5991> one possibility for that is to give each callback function an object to its parent
12:54 <@matricks> I see it more as an exercise then a real solution to anything :)
12:54 < heinrich5991> that's how I did callbacks in a rust project of mine
12:54 <@matricks> and I don't have like any time to spend on it so... I just got a huge hobby project dumped in my lap :)
12:55 < JulianAssange> i've never seen rust, but it's basically "secure" C++, right?
12:55 <@matricks> JulianAssange: "yes"
12:55 <@matricks> but in reality, no D:
12:55 < JulianAssange> so it's like java? :>
12:55 <@matricks> no
12:55 < heinrich5991> lolno
12:55 < JulianAssange> that was a joke
12:55 <@minus> java ain't safe
12:55 <@matricks> JulianAssange: and you are not funny
12:55 < JulianAssange> yes i am
12:56 < JulianAssange> too many companies want java programmers atm though
12:56 < JulianAssange> i've noticed, anyways, here in australia
12:56  * minus is one
12:57 < JulianAssange> my view is that java is c++ on training wheels
12:58 <@matricks> rust does some really intressting stuff with pointers and lifetimes however that I really hope works out
12:59 <@minus> lifetimes are such a thing
12:59 < heinrich5991> they however make it really hard to do zero-alloc stuff
12:59 < heinrich5991> and the standard library works again you in this respect
13:00 <@matricks> *against
13:00 <@matricks> havn't really looked into it
13:00 <@matricks> I think there were loads of problems with this due to the lack of DST
13:00 <@matricks> which should be in now
13:01 < JulianAssange> seems not: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/12938
13:01  * matricks is gonna be a web monkey the comming months however
13:01 < JulianAssange> php?
13:02 <@matricks> most probably
13:02 < JulianAssange> also since you love to do it too... coming*
13:02 <@matricks> the club website needs a revamp and make it more modern
13:03 <@matricks> trying to figure out what to build it with
13:04 < JulianAssange> is that why you were talking about javascript?
13:04 <@matricks> no, not really
13:04 <@matricks> that was pure troll mode :D
13:05 < JulianAssange> :P
13:05 <@minus> :P
13:05 <@matricks> had a discussion on a pub about javascript and how bad it actually is
13:05 <@minus> something something 10ft pole
13:05 <@matricks> and how I more and more dislike dynamic typed languages
13:05 <@minus> i get the same feeling
13:05 <@matricks> and imlicit casts
13:05 < JulianAssange> i have a pic somewhere, probably on twitter, where someone compares 10 + 1, 10 + "1" and "1" + 10 in javascript
13:06 <@matricks> does should go a and die in the fire
13:06 < JulianAssange> and the results are all messed up
13:06 <@matricks> JulianAssange: https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/wat
13:06 <@matricks> classic
13:06 <@minus> matricks: and implicity mutability
13:07 <@minus> is that the js talk?
13:07 <@matricks> yah
13:07 <@matricks> and some ruby
13:07 <@minus> ruby bad?
13:08 < JulianAssange> ok
13:08 <@matricks> [] + [] = "" in javascript
13:08 <@matricks> wat
13:08 < JulianAssange> wat
13:08 <@minus> also, on an unrelated note, fuckings to AVM, they're a bag of cunts
13:08 <@matricks> JulianAssange: just look at that video.. soo goood
13:09 < JulianAssange> i know
13:09 < JulianAssange> i'm watching it lol
13:09 < EastByte> https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript
13:09 < EastByte> is awesome also
13:10 < JulianAssange> "enough talking about languages that suck, let's talk about javascript"
13:10 < JulianAssange> woo
13:10 <@minus> interesting, i now have ADSL2+ Annex J (was B before)
13:11 < JulianAssange> watman
13:11 < JulianAssange> kek
13:11 < JulianAssange> ye good presentation
13:11 < jxsl13> EastByte +1
13:13 < JulianAssange> YavaScript
13:13 < JulianAssange> i don't get the joke
13:14 < JulianAssange> oh, i guess he's european and pronounces j's as y
13:19 < Learath2> EastByte: so i wasnt completely wrong :D
13:21 <@minus> 10 days?
14:48 < JulianAssange> man..
14:48 < JulianAssange> i got out my backup from a long time ago
14:48 < JulianAssange> for some reason.. now i can't remember why..
14:50 < JulianAssange> grrr...
15:09 < jxsl13> put it back from where you got it and then you ll rememer
15:29 < JulianAssange> i remembered, and it isn't there -.-
15:30 < JulianAssange> it was a nanorc file
15:30 < JulianAssange> i have an email on the harddrive talking about it, but the file is gone..
15:37 < JulianAssange> and on reboot my clock doesn't work anymore! :@
21:12 <@minus> so, this just happened: aur/rust-nightly-bin 0.13.0_2015.01.03-1 -> 1.0.0_2015.02.07-1
23:28 < jxsl13> is the fake ping "exploit" ever gonna be fixed?
23:35 < heinrich5991> fake exploit?
23:35 < heinrich5991> oh fake ping exploit
23:46 < jxsl13> well, like ppl able to change their ping however they want