[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2013 07:09:56 +0100
From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: formats that duplicate dynamics
On 01/27/2013 03:35 AM, Solar Designer wrote:
> However, there's a more general issue: can't the same be implemented as
> a dynamic format? In fact, doesn't one of the predefined dynamic formats
> support these same hashes already? Maybe we should just document what
> predefined dynamic format should be used, and make this prominent in its
> FORMAT_NAME (so that it'll be seen on --test runs)?
Another option is to write such a warning during init() or some other
format specific function.
Then, you'd have a full line of text, which is harder not to recognize.
(Added bonus: If we do the same for formats which were part of jumbo-7,
relbench would still be able to compare those formats without the need
to use benchmark-unify.
Frank
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
