Valhalla Legends Archive

"C++ Fundamentals" by Chuck Easttom, is what I'd suggest for the blatent beginner -- I started with it myself many a moon ago, $40 is what I paid then. I also recently came along an online version of it: http://www.charlesriver.com/resrcs/chapters/1584502371_1stChap.pdf

Quote
im not sure vb6's "doevents" in c++, so I just put a sleep(0) there.

LOL. Doesn't get any more clueless than that.

Another example of horny virgins (in this case Ken) defending Kayla.

If you can't be bothered reading, I was kicked+banned 3 times. Resorting to using a different account to avoid the megalomaniac.

P.S, Hi Kevin/Joe

Quote
[10:58:04 AM] <To your friends> Someone remind me tommorow
[10:58:11 AM] <To your friends> that Kayla has my 100psn/5%fhr Sc
[10:58:35 AM] Users in channel op kayla:
[10:58:35 AM] [*KAYLA], [*KEND.SUPPORT@BLIZZARD]
[10:59:50 AM] <From Kayla> Nevar
[11:03:09 AM] -- Joined channel: op kayla --
[11:03:18 AM] <Matt.J> Now ho, or I'll enable the backdoor in BnetDiagTool
[11:03:22 AM] <Matt.J> And stealz ur keyz
[11:03:23 AM] <Matt.J>
[11:03:27 AM] -- Joined channel: op laserblue --
[11:04:28 AM] <From waL.> holy shit i totally raped gar
[11:04:32 AM] <From Kayla> Rofl
[11:08:53 AM] <From Goph> back
[11:10:38 AM] [BNET] Disconnected.
[11:10:38 AM] All connections closed.
[11:10:47 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:10:47 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:10:47 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:10:47 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:10:48 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:10:48 AM] [BNET] 10053 -- Connection is aborted due to timeout or other failure
[11:10:48 AM] [BNET] Disconnected.
[11:10:48 AM] All connections closed.
[11:10:48 AM] [BNET] The Battle.net server has terminated your connection.
[11:10:48 AM] [BNET] Attempting to reconnect...
[11:10:49 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:10:49 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:10:49 AM] All connections closed.
[11:11:05 AM] All connections closed.
[11:11:08 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:11:08 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:11:09 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:11:09 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:11:09 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:11:09 AM] [BNET] 10053 -- Connection is aborted due to timeout or other failure
[11:11:09 AM] [BNET] Disconnected.
[11:11:09 AM] All connections closed.
[11:11:09 AM] [BNET] The Battle.net server has terminated your connection.
[11:11:09 AM] [BNET] Attempting to reconnect...
[11:11:10 AM] All connections closed.
[11:11:48 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:11:48 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:11:48 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:11:48 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:11:49 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:11:49 AM] [BNET] 10053 -- Connection is aborted due to timeout or other failure
[11:11:49 AM] [BNET] Disconnected.
[11:11:49 AM] All connections closed.
[11:11:49 AM] [BNET] The Battle.net server has terminated your connection.
[11:11:49 AM] [BNET] Attempting to reconnect...
[11:11:50 AM] All connections closed.
[11:11:50 AM] All connections closed.

Bot application closed, dumping chat screen.
[10:44:35 AM] -> Welcome to StealthBot v2.6 Revision 3, by Stealth.
[10:44:35 AM] -> If you enjoy StealthBot, consider supporting its development at http://support.stealthbot.net
[10:44:36 AM] >> StealthBot News
[10:44:36 AM] >> ---------------------
[10:44:36 AM] >> Battle.net Changes
[10:44:36 AM] >> ---------------------
[10:44:36 AM] >> Blizzard has made an addition version check system change.
[10:44:36 AM] >>
[10:44:36 AM] >> There is no way for you to patch this one at the time.
[10:44:36 AM] >> I am working on continuing to prepare the 2.7 release, which with
[10:44:36 AM] >> some concerted efforts can probably be launched by this weekend.
[10:44:36 AM] >> I will do my best. Thanks for your patience, and stay tuned to
[10:44:36 AM] >> http://www.stealthbot.net for updates.
[10:44:43 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[10:44:43 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[10:44:43 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[10:44:43 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[10:44:43 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[10:44:59 AM] All connections closed.
[10:45:13 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[10:45:13 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[10:45:13 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[10:45:13 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[10:45:14 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[10:45:14 AM] [BNET] Checking version...
[10:45:15 AM] [BNET] Client version accepted!
[10:45:15 AM] [BNET] Sending login information...
[10:45:15 AM] [BNET] Login successful.
[10:45:15 AM] [BNET] Logged on as LaserBlue.
[10:45:15 AM] -- Joined channel: op laserblue --
[10:45:15 AM] -- LaserBlue has acquired ops.
[10:45:15 AM] Account Created: 12/19/2007, 02:25:01 (Battle.net time)
[10:45:15 AM] Last Logon: 4/26/2008, 00:39:35 (Battle.net time)
[10:45:15 AM] Last Logoff: 4/24/2008, 12:11:54 (Battle.net time)
[10:45:15 AM] Time Logged: 39 days, 10 hours, 13 minutes and 12 seconds
[10:58:04 AM] <From Matt.J> Someone remind me tommorow
[10:58:11 AM] <From Matt.J> that Kayla has my 100psn/5%fhr Sc
[11:03:09 AM] -- Matt.J has left the channel.
[11:03:27 AM] -- Matt.J [171ms] has joined the channel using Diablo II (Open Character).
[11:05:00 AM] <From Matt.J> Gar is trash.
[11:05:03 AM] <Matt.J> 8-1 ezpk
[11:05:06 AM] <From Matt.J> 8-1 ezpk
[11:10:37 AM] <From Matt.J> Your friend Matt.J has exited Battle.net.
[11:10:37 AM] -- Matt.J has left the channel.
[11:10:40 AM] [BNET] Disconnected.
[11:10:40 AM] All connections closed.

Bot application closed, dumping chat screen.
[11:12:52 AM] -> Welcome to StealthBot v2.6 Revision 3, by Stealth.
[11:12:52 AM] -> If you enjoy StealthBot, consider supporting its development at http://support.stealthbot.net
[11:12:53 AM] >> StealthBot News
[11:12:53 AM] >> ---------------------
[11:12:53 AM] >> Battle.net Changes
[11:12:53 AM] >> ---------------------
[11:12:53 AM] >> Blizzard has made an addition version check system change.
[11:12:53 AM] >>
[11:12:53 AM] >> There is no way for you to patch this one at the time.
[11:12:53 AM] >> I am working on continuing to prepare the 2.7 release, which with
[11:12:53 AM] >> some concerted efforts can probably be launched by this weekend.
[11:12:53 AM] >> I will do my best. Thanks for your patience, and stay tuned to
[11:12:53 AM] >> http://www.stealthbot.net for updates.
[11:12:55 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:12:56 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:12:56 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:12:56 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:12:56 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:12:56 AM] [BNET] Checking version...
[11:12:57 AM] [BNET] Client version accepted!
[11:12:57 AM] [BNET] Sending login information...
[11:12:57 AM] [BNET] Login successful.
[11:12:58 AM] [BNET] Logged on as LaserBlue.
[11:12:58 AM] -- Joined channel: op laserblue --
[11:12:58 AM] -- LaserBlue has acquired ops.
[11:12:58 AM] Account Created: 12/19/2007, 02:25:01 (Battle.net time)
[11:12:58 AM] Last Logon: 4/26/2008, 01:08:13 (Battle.net time)
[11:12:58 AM] Last Logoff: 4/26/2008, 01:10:40 (Battle.net time)
[11:12:58 AM] Time Logged: 39 days, 10 hours, 38 minutes and 34 seconds
[11:13:23 AM] <LaserBlue> Kayla just got me temp banned
[11:13:24 AM] <LaserBlue> ;-|
[11:14:05 AM] <From Matt.J> Your friend Matt.J has entered Battle.net.
[11:14:05 AM] -- Matt.J [172ms] has joined the channel using Diablo II (Open Character).
[11:14:16 AM] <From Matt.J> That was gay, Kayla.
[11:15:29 AM] <From Matt.J> Who said you did? Guilty concious.
[11:16:48 AM] <From Matt.J> Your new nickname is Bumfluff, Kayla.
[11:16:51 AM] <From Matt.J> Hi Awroo
[11:17:11 AM] -- Reborn_God [94ms] has joined the channel using Diablo II Lord of Destruction (Matriarch ASorc, a level 89 sorceress on realm USWest).
[11:17:14 AM] <Matt.J>
[11:17:17 AM] <Reborn_God> o.o?
[11:17:22 AM] <Matt.J> Kayla got me temp banned ;-|
[11:18:00 AM] <From Matt.J> ... I was banned.
[11:18:01 AM] <Reborn_God> y?
[11:18:02 AM] <Reborn_God> :/
[11:18:04 AM] <Reborn_God> how?
[11:18:04 AM] <Reborn_God> XD
[11:18:07 AM] <From Matt.J> Just luckily I have a dynamic IP here.
[11:18:19 AM] <Matt.J> Do /who Op Kayla
[11:19:06 AM] -- Oilerfan [94ms] has joined the channel using Diablo II Lord of Destruction (Matriarch Silhouette, a level 24 sorceress on realm USWest).
[11:19:24 AM] <From Matt.J> What you mean?
[11:19:28 AM] <From Matt.J> Local Hashing?
[11:19:54 AM] <From Matt.J> not sure what you mean
[11:20:03 AM] <Reborn_God> XD
[11:20:12 AM] <Reborn_God> ohh wonder what there doing
[11:20:13 AM] <Reborn_God> :|!
[11:20:15 AM] <From Matt.J> i dont know
[11:20:16 AM] <Oilerfan> O_o?
[11:20:30 AM] <From Matt.J> lol?
[11:20:30 AM] <Reborn_God> matt whats kayla and ken doing?
[11:20:31 AM] <From Matt.J> :S
[11:20:38 AM] [BNET] Disconnected.
[11:20:38 AM] All connections closed.

Bot application closed, dumping chat screen.
[11:13:03 AM] -> Welcome to StealthBot v2.6 Revision 3, by Stealth.
[11:13:03 AM] -> If you enjoy StealthBot, consider supporting its development at http://support.stealthbot.net
[11:13:03 AM] >> StealthBot News
[11:13:03 AM] >> ---------------------
[11:13:03 AM] >> Battle.net Changes
[11:13:03 AM] >> ---------------------
[11:13:03 AM] >> Blizzard has made an addition version check system change.
[11:13:03 AM] >>
[11:13:03 AM] >> There is no way for you to patch this one at the time.
[11:13:03 AM] >> I am working on continuing to prepare the 2.7 release, which with
[11:13:03 AM] >> some concerted efforts can probably be launched by this weekend.
[11:13:03 AM] >> I will do my best. Thanks for your patience, and stay tuned to
[11:13:03 AM] >> http://www.stealthbot.net for updates.
[11:13:10 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:13:10 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:13:10 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:13:10 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:13:10 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:13:11 AM] [BNET] Checking version...
[11:13:13 AM] All connections closed.
[11:13:28 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:13:29 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:13:29 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:13:29 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:13:29 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:13:29 AM] [BNET] Checking version...
[11:13:33 AM] All connections closed.
[11:14:03 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:14:03 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:14:04 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:14:04 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:14:04 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:14:04 AM] [BNET] Checking version...
[11:14:05 AM] [BNET] Client version accepted!
[11:14:05 AM] [BNET] Sending login information...
[11:14:05 AM] [BNET] Login successful.
[11:14:05 AM] [BNET] Logged on as Matt.J.
[11:14:05 AM] -- Joined channel: op laserblue --
[11:14:05 AM] Account Created: 3/17/2007, 20:36:54 (Battle.net time)
[11:14:05 AM] Last Logon: 4/26/2008, 01:08:13 (Battle.net time)
[11:14:05 AM] Last Logoff: 4/26/2008, 01:10:40 (Battle.net time)
[11:14:05 AM] Time Logged: 182 days, 3 hours, 1 minutes and 46 seconds
[11:14:12 AM] Users in channel op kayla:
[11:14:12 AM] [*KAYLA], [*KEND.SUPPORT@BLIZZARD]
[11:14:16 AM] <To your friends> That was gay, Kayla.
[11:15:01 AM] <From Kayla> ?
[11:15:04 AM] <From Kayla> I did nothing
[11:15:29 AM] <To your friends> Who said you did? Guilty concious.
[11:16:27 AM] <From Kayla> Lol he didn't do anything either so who knows
[11:16:33 AM] <From Reborn_God> huny bunz
[11:16:39 AM] <From Reborn_God> swt drmz
[11:16:48 AM] <To your friends> Your new nickname is Bumfluff, Kayla.
[11:16:51 AM] <To your friends> Hi Awroo
[11:16:52 AM] <From Kayla> LOL
[11:16:56 AM] <From Kayla> [19:15:49] <To: Kayla> * matt.j => matt.j: BDJNOS
[11:17:01 AM] <From Kayla> No wonder you didn't get banned
[11:17:04 AM] <From Reborn_God> hi matt
[11:17:11 AM] -- Reborn_God [94ms] has joined the channel using Diablo II Lord of Destruction (Matriarch ASorc, a level 89 sorceress on realm USWest).
[11:17:14 AM] <Matt.J>
[11:17:17 AM] <Reborn_God> o.o?
[11:17:22 AM] <Matt.J> Kayla got me temp banned ;-|
[11:18:00 AM] <To your friends> ... I was banned.
[11:18:01 AM] <Reborn_God> y?
[11:18:02 AM] <Reborn_God> :/
[11:18:04 AM] <Reborn_God> how?
[11:18:04 AM] <Reborn_God> XD
[11:18:07 AM] <To your friends> Just luckily I have a dynamic IP here.
[11:18:19 AM] <Matt.J> Do /who Op Kayla
[11:18:20 AM] Your friends are:
[11:18:20 AM] 1: LaserBlue, (mutual) using Diablo II in the channel op laserblue.
[11:18:20 AM] 2: Sixen, (mutual) using Diablo II Lord of Destruction in the channel op laserblue.
[11:18:20 AM] 3: Bob_The_Evil, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 4: Ba1100n_Drag0n@Lordaeron, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 5: ClanKK.@Lordaeron, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 6: deathspirit-hct, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 7: Louis.PT, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 8: deathplauge-hct, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 9: Smashbros, (mutual) using Diablo II Lord of Destruction in the game Anc2 (private).
[11:18:20 AM] 10: dmbmg3, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 11: 5krash5-GK, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 12: Godwe_Poison, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 13: DeathKnight-GK, (mutual) using Diablo II Lord of Destruction in the channel op GK.HQ.
[11:18:20 AM] 14: Ramyun., offline
[11:18:20 AM] 15: CrazyViet, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 16: Marines-GK, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 17: MATTMONGO, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 18: Reborn_God, (mutual) using Diablo II Lord of Destruction in the channel op laserblue.
[11:18:20 AM] 19: J-Ross-Gk, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 20: Networkz.com, offline
[11:18:20 AM] 21: Kayla, (mutual) using Warcraft II in the channel op kayla.
[11:18:20 AM] 22: Kazza., offline
[11:18:20 AM] 23: Wal., (mutual) using Diablo II Lord of Destruction in the game Wal1 (private).
[11:18:27 AM] Users in channel op kayla:
[11:18:27 AM] [*KAYLA], [*KEND.SUPPORT@BLIZZARD]
[11:19:05 AM] <From deathknight-gk> hey matt whast the logon thing for windows vista on the stealth bot
[11:19:06 AM] -- Oilerfan [94ms] has joined the channel using Diablo II Lord of Destruction (Matriarch Silhouette, a level 24 sorceress on realm USWest).
[11:19:13 AM] <From deathknight-gk> instead of the bnlsserver
[11:19:24 AM] <To your friends> What you mean?
[11:19:28 AM] <To your friends> Local Hashing?
[11:19:42 AM] <From deathknight-gk>  n the configs
[11:19:54 AM] <To your friends> not sure what you mean
[11:20:03 AM] <Reborn_God> XD
[11:20:08 AM] <From deathknight-gk> what im supose to put under [main]
[11:20:12 AM] <Reborn_God> ohh wonder what there doing
[11:20:13 AM] <Reborn_God> :|!
[11:20:15 AM] <To your friends> i dont know
[11:20:16 AM] <Oilerfan> O_o?
[11:20:23 AM] <From deathknight-gk> u told me b4 low
[11:20:26 AM] <From deathknight-gk> lol
[11:20:30 AM] <To your friends> lol?
[11:20:30 AM] <Reborn_God> matt whats kayla and ken doing?
[11:20:31 AM] <From deathknight-gk> keyla u there?
[11:20:31 AM] <To your friends> :S
[11:20:34 AM] <From Kayla> Mhmm
[11:20:36 AM] <From LaserBlue> Your friend LaserBlue has exited Battle.net.
[11:20:36 AM] -- LaserBlue has left the channel.
[11:20:37 AM] <Matt.J> No idea.
[11:20:38 AM] [BNET] Disconnected.
[11:20:38 AM] All connections closed.
[11:20:48 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:20:48 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:20:49 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:20:49 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:20:49 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:20:49 AM] [BNET] 10053 -- Connection is aborted due to timeout or other failure
[11:20:49 AM] [BNET] Disconnected.
[11:20:49 AM] All connections closed.
[11:20:49 AM] [BNET] The Battle.net server has terminated your connection.
[11:20:49 AM] [BNET] Attempting to reconnect...
[11:20:50 AM] All connections closed.
[11:20:50 AM] All connections closed.

[11:21:38 AM] -> Welcome to StealthBot v2.6 Revision 3, by Stealth.
[11:21:38 AM] -> If you enjoy StealthBot, consider supporting its development at http://support.stealthbot.net
[11:21:39 AM] >> StealthBot News
[11:21:39 AM] >> ---------------------
[11:21:39 AM] >> Battle.net Changes
[11:21:39 AM] >> ---------------------
[11:21:39 AM] >> Blizzard has made an addition version check system change.
[11:21:39 AM] >>
[11:21:39 AM] >> There is no way for you to patch this one at the time.
[11:21:39 AM] >> I am working on continuing to prepare the 2.7 release, which with
[11:21:39 AM] >> some concerted efforts can probably be launched by this weekend.
[11:21:39 AM] >> I will do my best. Thanks for your patience, and stay tuned to
[11:21:39 AM] >> http://www.stealthbot.net for updates.
[11:21:41 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:21:42 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:21:42 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:21:42 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:21:42 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:21:42 AM] [BNET] Checking version...
[11:21:43 AM] [BNET] Client version accepted!
[11:21:43 AM] [BNET] Sending login information...
[11:21:43 AM] [BNET] Login successful.
[11:21:43 AM] [BNET] Logged on as Matt.J.
[11:21:43 AM] -- Joined channel: op laserblue --
[11:21:44 AM] Account Created: 3/17/2007, 20:36:54 (Battle.net time)
[11:21:44 AM] Last Logon: 4/26/2008, 01:15:22 (Battle.net time)
[11:21:44 AM] Last Logoff: 4/26/2008, 01:15:22 (Battle.net time)
[11:21:44 AM] Time Logged: 182 days, 3 hours, 8 minutes and 16 seconds
[11:21:44 AM] <From Kayla> I don't use such trash bots lol
[11:27:55 AM] -> Welcome to StealthBot v2.6 Revision 3, by Stealth.
[11:21:46 AM] <From deathknight-gk> the bnls dont work w vista right?
[11:27:55 AM] -> If you enjoy StealthBot, consider supporting its development at http://support.stealthbot.net
[11:21:50 AM] <From Kayla> Lol I told him not too matthew
[11:27:56 AM] >> StealthBot News
[11:21:54 AM] <From Kayla> He's become a rogue employee
[11:27:56 AM] >> ---------------------
[11:21:57 AM] <To your friends> Lol.
[11:27:56 AM] >> Battle.net Changes
[11:22:09 AM] <From Kayla> afk
[11:27:56 AM] >> ---------------------
[11:22:19 AM] <From deathknight-gk> >.<
[11:27:56 AM] >> Blizzard has made an addition version check system change.
[11:22:19 AM] <Matt.J> Banned again
[11:27:56 AM] >>
[11:22:21 AM] <From Kayla> ...
[11:27:56 AM] >> There is no way for you to patch this one at the time.
[11:22:26 AM] <From Kayla> Bnls works with vista...
[11:27:56 AM] >> I am working on continuing to prepare the 2.7 release, which with
[11:22:39 AM] <From deathknight-gk> why is my bot not workin
[11:27:56 AM] >> some concerted efforts can probably be launched by this weekend.
[11:22:41 AM] <From Kayla> Both my bots use bnls to pull the info
[11:22:41 AM] <From deathknight-gk> >.<
[11:27:56 AM] >> I will do my best. Thanks for your patience, and stay tuned to
[11:22:45 AM] <From Kayla> I unno afk
[11:27:56 AM] >> http://www.stealthbot.net for updates.
[11:23:25 AM] All connections closed.
[11:28:03 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:23:44 AM] [BNLS] Connecting...
[11:28:03 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:23:44 AM] [BNLS] Connected!
[11:28:03 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:23:44 AM] [BNLS] Authorized!
[11:28:03 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:23:44 AM] [BNET] Connecting...
[11:28:03 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:23:45 AM] [BNET] Connected!
[11:28:04 AM] [BNET] Checking version...
[11:23:45 AM] [BNET] Checking version...
[11:28:05 AM] [BNET] Client version accepted!
[11:23:46 AM] [BNET] Client version accepted!
[11:28:05 AM] [BNET] Sending login information...
[11:23:46 AM] [BNET] Sending login information...
[11:28:05 AM] [BNET] Login successful.
[11:23:46 AM] [BNET] Login successful.
[11:28:05 AM] [BNET] Logged on as LaserBlue.
[11:23:46 AM] [BNET] Logged on as Inuendo.
[11:28:05 AM] -- Joined channel: op laserblue --
[11:23:46 AM] -- Joined channel: op laserblue --
[11:28:05 AM] -- LaserBlue has acquired ops.
[11:23:46 AM] Account Created: 11/15/2007, 06:54:36 (Battle.net time)
[11:28:05 AM] Account Created: 12/19/2007, 02:25:01 (Battle.net time)
[11:23:46 AM] Last Logon: 4/26/2008, 01:22:31 (Battle.net time)
[11:28:05 AM] Last Logon: 4/26/2008, 01:22:31 (Battle.net time)
[11:23:46 AM] Last Logoff: 11/15/2007, 07:06:10 (Battle.net time)
[11:28:05 AM] Last Logoff: 4/26/2008, 01:15:22 (Battle.net time)
[11:23:46 AM] Time Logged: 0 days, 0 hours, 16 minutes and 29 seconds
[11:28:05 AM] Time Logged: 39 days, 10 hours, 46 minutes and 12 seconds
[11:23:52 AM] <Reborn_God> :/
[11:28:10 AM] Users in channel op kayla:
[11:24:11 AM] <Inuendo> I'll stay on this account till KenD pulls the cock out of his ass.
[11:24:17 AM] <Oilerfan> LOL
[11:28:10 AM] [*KAYLA], [*KEND.SUPPORT@BLIZZARD]
[11:24:26 AM] <Inuendo> I only have 3 IP's left
[11:35:10 AM] You have 1000 access and flags A.
[11:35:11 AM] You are *LaserBlue, using Diablo II in a private channel.
[11:24:27 AM] <Inuendo> ;S
[11:26:01 AM] -- Oilerfan has left the channel.
[11:26:19 AM] <Reborn_God> i gtg
[11:26:31 AM] -- Reborn_God has left the channel.
[11:35:38 AM] That character is not logged on.  Try using *username to message a user or character@realm to message a character in a different realm.
[11:28:05 AM] -- LaserBlue [187ms] has joined the channel using Diablo II (Open Character).
[11:28:05 AM] -- LaserBlue has acquired ops.
[11:50:25 AM] -- Kk)RagE(kK [219ms] has joined the channel using Starcraft (1 wins).
[11:50:30 AM] <Kk)RagE(kK> inuendo?
[11:50:25 AM] -- Kk)RagE(kK [219ms] has joined the channel using Starcraft (1 wins).
[11:50:36 AM] -- Lakis [219ms] has joined the channel using Starcraft (0 wins).
[11:50:30 AM] <Kk)RagE(kK> inuendo?
[11:51:27 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:24:11 AM] <Inuendo> I'll stay on this account till KenD pulls the cock out of his ass.
[11:50:36 AM] -- Lakis [219ms] has joined the channel using Starcraft (0 wins).
[11:51:27 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:24:11 AM] <Inuendo> I'll stay on this account till KenD pulls the cock out of his ass.
[11:51:27 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:24:17 AM] <Oilerfan> LOL
[11:51:28 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:24:17 AM] <Oilerfan> LOL
[11:51:28 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:24:26 AM] <Inuendo> I only have 3 IP's left
[11:51:30 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:24:27 AM] <Inuendo> ;S
[11:51:29 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:24:26 AM] <Inuendo> I only have 3 IP's left
[11:51:44 AM] <Lakis> lawl.
[11:51:30 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:24:27 AM] <Inuendo> ;S
[11:51:45 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:21:50 AM] <From Kayla> Lol I told him not too matthew
[11:51:44 AM] <Lakis> lawl.
[11:51:46 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:21:54 AM] <From Kayla> He's become a rogue employee
[11:51:46 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:21:50 AM] <From Kayla> Lol I told him not too matthew
[11:51:57 AM] <Inuendo> He's banned me 3 times.
[11:51:46 AM] <Inuendo>  [11:21:54 AM] <From Kayla> He's become a rogue employee
[11:51:59 AM] <Inuendo> =|
[11:52:20 AM] <Lakis> :S.
[11:51:58 AM] <Inuendo> He's banned me 3 times.
[11:52:31 AM] <Inuendo> ./who op kayla

Quote
No, quite frankly it's a revolution in programming.
It gives the power to the programmer to control aspects of his program in unprecedented ways (well except for Java but who cares about them) and gives you the flexibility to implement the same idea over various languages in the .NET Branch.

In other words, all .NET languages are immediately interoperable and understand each other at even the most intricate levels.

That, and the language itself contains various advancements over even C++ in terms of raw feautures. They make the life of the programmer easier, ease of use means it takes you less time to write functional code. Time is money.

It's ridiculously easy to write a tool chain in .NET for any sort of project, it offers a rich UI experience coupled with the already ease of use of the .NET Framework.

The beauty of .NET is, if you don't like C#..use VB .NET, or C++/CLI, or IronPython/PHP/Ruby, or Boo, whatever. Hell, write your own .NET language.

Like Banana said, it offers the advantage of not having to worry about tracking memory or memory corruption.

This has plenty of advantages, first your programs are guaranteed a certain degree of performance since the Garbage Collector handles all of the loose ends of allocated memory. Secondly, for example in a Game programming environment where your code can  quickly become intertwined with various classes, it's a big advantage to have a Garbage Collected language cleaning up your messes of objects in hierarchal graphs.

Additionally, when you use a .NET Language you get the entire set of class libraries which ship with the runtime. You get access to classes to deal with almost everything. Want to access the registry? There's a class for that. Want to use a List of items? Class for that. Use a hash table? Class for that. Windowing? 2D Drawing? Cryptology? Classes for all of that. Just have a look around it one day, you'll be very pleased.

Bottom line is: .NET makes the programmer's life easier, easier equals less time spent, time equals money. .NET saves you money.

Broken down to: Programmer's are lazy and no longer skilled enough to deal with concepts beyond pretty pictures.

Honestly, if you need the language/framework to protect you from memory corruption and memory managment altogether, you shouldn't be a programmer at all.

Quote
No, it's because C is genuinely harder to use. Something harder to use, takes more caution, takes more planning, takes reevaluating, takes patching on a more frequent level than managed or even C++ applications.

This adds up and you find yourself wasting time better spent writing code in other parts of the project. Time is money. You're losing money.

It isn't just about the learning curve though, it's about moving past the unnecessary cruft from the past few years. Computers have evolved, programming has evolved, and therefore languages must evolve as well.

Take a look at C# without the .NET Framework, there's no doubting that when the ignorance about the Framework is eliminated from the picture that it's an incredible language. It's everything C++ should of been, and the only thing even worth touching (in the Cish world) is D at the moment.

I'll go back to my car analogy, why don't you drive a 70's rust bucket for the sake of it being harder? Hell, lose the power steering, seats, and wheels.
Why not just walk? It's harder, so it must be better.

Programming Languages are the same way, and I'd certainly take a sports car (C#) over walking on foot (C) any day.

Exactly, it's harder for you to use: You are one of those people.

You'd only be wasting time if you did not know what you were doing, which would imply the design phase has failed, nothing to do with the language.

Why would languages need to evolve? The .NET framework is hardly a language either, it's no different from any other library, like MFC. That said, all of your arguments fail if one was to simply write his/her own library, which many people do in the first place.

Your analogy makes you sound alot more like a user, rather than a programmer.

Quote
Aren't OCX files pretty much Code reuse in VB6? As for older cars, my dad drives a 1947 Chevy Pickup  The car analogy is not a good one, because really old cars are really cool, whereas I wouldn't ever want to use older languages like APL or FORTRAN nowadays.

OCX, COM, DLL, EXE, they're all the same, PE format. Just depends on the interpretation.

Quote
Why would it? From what RealityRipple has shown me, his PowerBASIC is nearly the same thing as C with BASIC syntax. It could be quite low level if one wanted to. A language is a method of transmitting ideas, so really, all languages are the same except for the built-in limitations imposed by the compiler itself. Note: A language with BASIC syntax and a language like Visual Basic 6 are entirely different things, you don't get cute boilerplate window code in PowerBASIC

Care to put that to the test?

Quote
Actually, only Microsoft renditions of BASIC are really limited. Most other versions have powerful compilers that contend with languages like C. I really don't want to start arguing about this though, so this is all I'm contributing to this topic from here on out.

"Contend with C", that made me laugh.

Quote
Why should it not be?

There needs to be just cause. People claim C is complex and 'hard' simply because they're idiots who don't know any better. The simple abstractions for languages are fine, just not the extent something like VB takes it to. C++ provided great language support for OO design, C# just killed it.

There is no "best" programming paradigm, just because OO-programming is mainstream does not mean it's the only way to view a problem. Personally, I'm sick of seeing all these new 'high-level' languages and frameworks, it's just compensation for programmer intelligence (something that is already at a low).
Programming was never meant to be a simple feat, and I fail to see why it should become one for the sake of allowing any random computer geek into the field; the argument of "faster development time" just proves this point, if you're actually a skilled programmer (and more-so an intelligent person) the methodology you use is totally irrelevent, and to argue otherwise would mean you're simply not experienced enough in it.

As any professional developer would know, the task of writing code is a relatively small step in the overall development cycle. Hell, you could write your whole solution in assembly, presuming you're a fast typer and capable of switching between multiple levels of abstract thought.

I'm not actually against OO design, I use it, just not formally within the language (C++). Then again, I use alot of assembly aswell

Std lib is disgusting

Quote
The standard calling convention for C++ on Win32 x86 says that EAX, ECX, and EDX may not be preserved by the called function.  That is, you must not rely on their value being the same after the function call as it was before the function call.

Yes, my bad on that behalf. Non-volatile*

Quote
The caller normally expects ebp to be preserved across function calls, which is why it can be used as a stack frame pointer.

Hence why I said volatile, but I understand why you say because of my mistake in the previous

Quote
Just wondering, why wasn't ebx listed with win32's list of volatile registers? must it be preserved or something? I've been modifying ebx just like eax or ecx and i've had no errors.

That would be just luck that no caller's have used EBX.

Volatile:
EBX, ESI, EDI, EBP (If using stack frames)

Non-volatile:
EAX ECX EDX


If you're writing a CPU-intensive routine that requires alot of frequently accessed data, you can also use ESP (Failure to preserve this, will just cause a myriad of problems )

Too bad you can't use GS, as I found out the other day

I believe you also need to preserve some FPU flag register (if using the FPU), not sure exactly since I don't use floating-point math much.

You'll get my welcome when you migrate to C++ and/or asm.

Quote
EBP is not volatile.  You must preserve the previous value.  You may get away with treating it as volatile if the caller happens not to need it after the call.  Stack frames are very nice for debugging, since it lets the debugger generate a proper callstack reliably.  If you do not use stack frames, the debugger is forced to guess, and that rarely turns out well.

Ofcourse EBP is volatile, unless stack frames are actually disabled (and I would presume in the thread starter's case it is, as it is for most). I think you're confused as to what volatile means; as you say "you must preserve the previous value", hence why EBP is considered volatile across function calls.

For the average user, 2GB is plenty. Regardless of how many tasks are going to be running, it would be hard to amass that much memory usage; high-end games consume, what, 1GB at the max? The only exception here would be if he's planning to run server software, still, if a home server of sorts is consuming that much memory it would be more than likely it's expanded beyond the requirements of a simple home user's connection.

Even if he does, at some point in time, require more memory there is such a thing as upgrading. And in which case would probably end up being better finacial-wise anyway.

64-bit architecture has relatively nothing to do with 'preparing for the future of memory usage', if it did, then there must be systems out there with above ~280TB memory requirements, as that's the maximum addressable by an x86 processor.

It would be more worthwhile investing in faster RAM, PC-12800 (22GB/s) is $500.

Quote
It also pops my stack for me, I don't have to add 16 to esp manually. Say, msdn said that you're supposed to pop it to ebx 4 times,
but is adding 16 to esp a good idea? (will it mess something up in the long run?) Doing that seems like i'm just making a workaround to
stop the _chkesp error box and nothing more.

It depends on the calling convention, all conventions I know of require the callee to pop the parameters off the stack. The only
exception (I'm aware of) is those conventions that accept a dynamic number of arguments.

Quote
why does the following code crash when it calls sprintf? :/

I'm too tired to bother trying to read that (might want to clean it), but I'd say it's something to do with the fact sprintf is a
cdecl (dynamic param count) call: You need to pop the given parameters, who knows what the function does (then again, you can just
walk through it with a disassembler)

Quote
I intend to eventually make a bot in asm. Now to find out how to access a struct's members...

There's no reason you cannot use identifiers in asm.

Quote
Indeed, why waste your own time writing a bot in ASM when a well written bot in even VB6 can do the job.

Naughty naughty.


--
Personally, Brew, I think you may want to spend some time reading into processor architecture. (Intel.com, "IA Manuals") and aquire
a little more knowledge before you attempt a task such as a chat client.

I've been working with assembly for several years now, it's an extremely enlightening learning experience, yet the practical applications
assembly has is minimal. Even so, most of my projects are written in a 40:60 Asm to C ratio, mainly due to I'm a performance nazi and have
enough experience to far outperform any compiler. Still, not even I would bother writing a whole chat client in pure assembly, the
amount of time you'll spend debugging (especially since you're a relative novice) is going to consume project time 10 fold.

At present, you are not going to be outperforming the compiler, not even Borland, so here's a few pointers for when working with Asm:

1. Do not use half-registers, (ie, WORD), there's a good possibility of a stall depending on how many write's are in flight.
2. Structure your code so a branch is only taken on the least-likely outcome.
3. Avoid branches whenever possible, if possible, substitute with conditional instructions (CMOV, SETCC, ect...)
4. Align loops on 16-byte boundaries (use the ALIGN directive)
5. If you plan to use a spin-wait loop (I presume you'll be multithreading), then insert a PAUSE instruction to avoid cache thrashing on exit.
6. Align data on their natural size boundaries (I'm sure you know this)
7. Use the addressing modes supported by the processor, instead of calculating address yourself (such as scaled index). LEA is your friend also.
8. MUL/DIV are two of the most expensive instructions, (~30 clocks (Processor-dependent)), use shifts (SHL/SHR/ect) when possible.
9. Serialize data access, perform write's in chunks instead of patterns like: read/read/write/read/write.

A few other things to keep in mind:

* EAX, ECX, EDX are considered volatile registers in C++, thus you are free to use them in your own assembly routines without corrupting
  the caller's state (important when mixing Asm and C).

* Try using the naked (__declspec(naked)) modifier when writing assembly routines, this enables (and requires) you to write the prologue and epilogue
  allowing you to also use EBP (Personally, I never use EBP for "stack frames", it's worthless) (Note: EBP _is_ volatile)

* If you use registers in your assembly routines other than EAX,EDX,ECX, you must preserve the caller's value of these register (this is the prologue/epilogue)


Anything else, feel free to ask.

If you want ugly code, PvPGN is the best source.

EDIT: No matter, figured it out. Seems it's the console output consuming all that time... reminds me why I don't like using the std lib. (Freely move to the trash can )


Either I'm implementing them wrong, or they're extremely inefficent.

I did a simple test of transfering 2MB locally with both an IOCP and standard recv(). It took the recv() under 16ms, while the IOCP took 1,500ms+. I must admit I think I'm implementing IOCP wrong, I would think it's impossible to take anywhere near a second to receive data from a local endpoint.

NOTE: This is my first attempt using IOCP, one of the Window's concepts I never delved into till now.


(IOCP)

for(;;)
{
dwStartTime = GetTickCount();

if(WSARecv(hClient, &Buf, 1, &dwReceived, &dwFlags, &Overlapped, NULL) == SOCKET_ERROR)
{
if((dwError = GetLastError()) != 997)
{
std::cout << "Error = " << GetLastError() << std::endl;
}
}

else
{
if(dwReceived)
{
std::cout << "Immediate completion (dwReceived = " << dwReceived << ")\n";
dwTotal += dwReceived;
}
}

dwOther += GetTickCount() - dwStartTime;


dwStartTime = GetTickCount();

// wait
if((dwEnd = GetQueuedCompletionStatus(IoPort, &dwReceived, &dwKey, &pOverlapped, INFINITE)) != 0)
{
std::cout << "Async Completed (dwReceived = " << dwReceived << ")\n";
}

else
{
dwTotal += GetLastError();
}

dwMaxTime += GetTickCount() - dwStartTime;



if(dwTotal >= 2000000) break;
}


(Standard recv(). (Synchronous/blocking)

for(;;)
{
dwTotal += recv(hClient, (char*) Data, 20000, NULL);

if(dwTotal >= 2 000 000) break;
}


Excuse the sloppy code, just testing.

Note that, it seems WSARecv(...) is consuming most of the time (1,300ms+).