I know gdb has several means of exploring data, some of them quite convenient. However, I cannot combine them to get that I need/want. I would like to display some custom string based on the first n values of a big array starting at <PT_arr>, and the last m values of the same array at a distance (in this case) 4096. Looking something like this:
table beginning:
0x804cfe0 <PT_arr>: 0x00100300 0x00200300 0x00300300 0x00400300
table end:
0x804cfe0 <PT_arr+4064>: 0x00500300 0x00600300 0x00700300 0x00800300
printf let's me add custom text (like table beginning)
the examine x gives me that nice alignment, let's me read many elements and group them by byte, words, etc; and shows addresses at the left (which is ideal for my case).
x aligns the content of regions of memory in an easy to read manner with the size and unit parameters. (what I want)
display is constantly printing. (what I want).
The issue with display (manual), is that unlike examine x (manual) it doesn't have a size or unit parameter.
Is there a way to accomplish that?
Thanks.
I understood the process to shorten the URL with base 62 at How do I create a URL shortener?.
Steps given are
Think of an alphabet we want to use. In your case, that's [a-zA-Z0-9]. It contains 62 letters.
Take an auto-generated, unique numerical key (the auto-incremented id of a MySQL table for example).
For this example, I will use 12510 (125 with a base of 10).
Now you have to convert 12510 to X62 (base 62)
My question is why not just create unique numerical key and return it ? What is the advantage of concerting numerical key > Base 62 > then Finally some alphanumeric number ?
Is it because final alphanumeric number will be much smaller than unique numerical key ?
Yes. The idea is to make it short and usable in a URL. A number in base 62 will use fewer characters than the same number in base 10. Notice also that URL shorteners use short hosts, such as g.co.
I can see you understand that, yes, a number written in base 62 takes less characters than a number in base 10 just like a number in base 10 takes less characters than a number in base 2 (e.g. 0101 is 3 characters longer than just '5').
So, I'll answer specifically "Why".
Sometimes a link is shortened to be more visually pleasing. A company worried about their public perception likely doesn't want their links to look like an error code due to how long they are so they resort to shortening. That's why some url shortening services allow you to add your own "vanity url" which customizes the domain name, so that a link can be shortened and branded.
Other times a link is shortened to minimize character count when working with constraints, like Twitter. For example, at my company we shortened the links in our automated Twilio messages because SMS messages that contain more than 160 characters are technically 2 concatenated messages so it is more expensive to send.
And finally if the link is being shared through a medium that cannot be directly clicked on (e.g. verbally, on paper), making it shorter makes it much easier to type into an address bar manually. (Imagine trying to type the url to this SO question when someone is reading it to you.) I assume this is also at least partially why the base used for these links usually stop at around 62. If you start including other arbitrary characters to higher the base and consequentially make the link marginally shorter, it'll become harder to communicate, read and type. ("domain.name/5omeC0d3" vs "domian.name/🈲}♠ "
How can I get the value of important id and ValueType?
I have tried using web_save_param_regexp (but unfortunately I don't fully understand how the function works).
I have also tried using web_save_param (with the help of offset and length).
unfortunately once again I cannot get the accurate value some values change in length specially when the total amount values dynamically changes per run.
<important id=\"insertsomevalueshere\" record=\"1\" nucTotal=\"NUC609.40\"><total amount=\"68.75\" currency=\"USD\"/><total amount=\"609.40\" currency=\"USD\"/><out avgsomecost=\"540.65\" ValueType=\"insertsomevalueshere\" containsawesomeness=\"1\" Score=\"-97961\" somedatatype=\"1\" typeofData=\"VAL\" web=\"1\">
Put these lines of code before the line of code which does your web request:
web_reg_save_param_regexp("ParamName=importantid","Regexp=<important id=\\\"(.*?)\\\"",LAST);
web_reg_save_param_regexp("ParamName=ValueType","Regexp= ValueType=\\\"(.*?)\\\"",LAST);
You will then have two stored parameters 'importantid' and 'ValueType'
Dynamic number of elements to correlate? Your path for resubmission is through web_custom_request(). You will need to build the string you need dynamically with the name:value pairs for all of the data which needs to be included.
This path will place a premium on your string manipulation skills in the language of the tool. The default path is through C, but you have other language options if your skills are more refined in another language.
I'm trying to read files and create a hashmap of the contents, but I'm having trouble at the parsing step. An example of the text file is
put 3
returns 3
between
3
pargraphs 1
4
3
#foo 18
****** 2
The word becomes the key and the number is the value. Notice that the spacing is fairly erratic. The word isn't always a word (which doesn't get picked up by /\w+/) and the number associated with that word isn't always on the same line. This is why I'm calling it not well-formed. If there were one word and one number on one line, I could just split it, but unfortunately, this isn't the case. I'm trying to create a hashmap like this.
{"put"=>3, "#foo"=>18, "returns"=>3, "paragraphs"=>1, "******"=>2, "4"=>3, "between"=>3}
Coming from Java, it's fairly easy. Using Scanner I could just use scanner.next() for the next key and scanner.nextInt() for the number associated with it. I'm not quite sure how to do this in Ruby when it seems I have to use regular expressions for everything.
I'd recommend just using split, as in:
h = Hash[*s.split]
where s is your text (eg s = open('filename').read. Believe it or not, this will give you precisely what you're after.
EDIT: I realized you wanted the values as integers. You can add that as follows:
h.each{|k,v| h[k] = v.to_i}
My problem:
I'm looking for a way to represent a person's name and address as an encoded id. The id should contain only alpha-numeric characters, be collision-proof, and be represented in a smallest number of characters possible. My first thought was to simply use a cryptographic hash function like MD5 or SHA1, but this seems like overkill (security isn't important - doesn't need to be one-way) and I'd prefer to find something that would produce a shorter id. Does anyone know of an existing algorithm that fits this problem?
In other words, what is the best way to implement the following function so that the return value is the same consistently for the same input, collisions are unlikely, and ids are less than 20 characters?
>>> make_fake_id(fname = 'Oscar', lname = 'Grouch', stnum = '1', stname = 'Sesame', zip = '12345')
N1743123734
Application Context (for those that are interested):
This will be used for a record linkage app. Given an input name and address we search a very large database for the best match and return the database id and other data (how we do this is not important here). If there isn't a match I need to generate this psuedo/generated/derived id from the search input (entity's name and address data). Every search record should result in an output record with either a real (the actual database id resulting from a match/link) or this generated psuedo/generated/derived id. The psuedo id will be prefixed with a character (e.g. N) to differentiate it from a real id.
I know you said no to MD5 and SHA1, but I think you should consider them anyway. As well as being well studied hashing algorithms, the length gives you more protection against possible collisions. No hash is collision-proof, but the cryptographic ones generally are less collision-prone than something you couuld come up with yourself.
Use a cryptographic hash for its collision resistance, not its other qualities
Use as many bytes from the hash as you want (truncate)
convert to alpha-numeric characters
You can also truncate the alpha-numeric string instead of the hash
An easy way to do this: hash the data, encode in base64, remove all non-alpha-numeric characters, truncate.
N_HASH_CHARS = 11
import hashlib, re
def digest(name, address):
hash = hashlib.md5(name + "|" + address).digest().encode("base64")
alnum_hash = re.sub(r'[^a-zA-Z0-9]', "", hash)
return alnum_hash[:N_HASH_CHARS]
How many alpha-numeric characters should you keep? Each character gives you around 5.95 bits of entropy (log(62,2)). 11 characters give you 65.5 bits of entropy, which should be enough to avoid a collision for the first 2**32.7 users (about 7 billion).
A good solution is somewhat dependent on your application. Do you know how many users and what the set of all users is? If you provide more details you would get better help.
I agree with the other poster suggesting serial numbers. OTOH, if you really, really really want to do something else:
Create a SHA1 hash from the data, and store it in a table with a serial number field.
Then, when you get the data, calculate the hash, look it up on the table, get the serial, and that's your id. If it's not on the table, insert it.
I wonder whether you intend to "assign" these ids to the users? If so, I would expect your users to hate anything that you propose; who would want a user id of "AAAAA01"?
So, if these ids are visible to the user, then you should just let them pick what they like and check them for uniqueness (easy). If they are not visible to the user (e.g., internal primary key), then just generate them sequentially using an appropriate technique such as an Oracle Sequence or SQL Server AutoNumber (also easy).
If these ids are an attempt to detect a user that is registering more than once, then I would agree that you should consider a cryptographic hash followed by a full comparison of the registration data (name, address, etc.). However, to be usable, you will need to translate the data into a canonical form (standardized letter case, whitespace, canonical street address, etc.) before computing the hash or making the comparison. Otherwise, you will mismatch based on trivial differences.
EDIT: Now that I understand the problem space better based on your edits, I think that it is highly unlikely that your algorithm (so far) will catch most matches. Beyond my suggestion to canonicalize the inputs, I recommend that you consider an approach that results in a ranked list of a handful of possible matches (to be resolved by a human if possible) rather than an all-or-nothing attempt at a single match. In other words, I recommend a search approach rather than a lookup approach.
Is that feasible in your situation?
Well, if there's more than one person at the same address with the same name, you're toast here, (w/o adding code to detect this and add a discriminator of some kind).
but assuming that issue is not, then the street address and zip code portion of the full addresss is sufficient to guaranteee uniqueness there, so adding enough data from the name should take care of the issue...
Do you have access to a database, or other persistence mechanism, where you could generate and maintain key values for each address? Then keep the address and individual entities in two keyed dictionary structures, where the key is autogenerated for each new distinct address, person encountered... and then use the autogenerated alpha-numeric key...
You could use AAAAA01 for first person at first address,
AAAAA02 for second person at first address,
AAAAB07 for the seventh resident at the second adresss, etc.
If you donlt have any way to generate and maintain these entity-Key mappings then you need to use the full street address/Zip and fullNAme, or a hash value of the same, although the Hash value approach has a smnall chance of generating duplicates...