[Bro-Dev] Scientific notation?

Jim Mellander jmellander at lbl.gov
Mon Nov 6 12:03:16 PST 2017

How about a user redef'able format string for doubles in logs?  Even more
flexible would be to make it a function.  Let the user decide the format
they need, and adapt their scripts accordingly, with the default being the
current behavior.

On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Daniel Thayer <dnthayer at illinois.edu>

> On 11/6/17 8:16 AM, Seth Hall wrote:
> > Right now, Bro will print scientific notation in JSON logs but we've
> > always tended to avoid it in the standard Bro log format.  What does
> > everyone think about switching to allow scientific notation in the
> > standard log format?  Daniel recently did some exploration of various
> > versions of awk and they all support scientific notation (I think that
> > was part of my concern a long time ago).
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> >     .Seth
> Actually, right now Bro uses scientific notation in JSON logs only
> for very large values (such as 3.1e+15).  For values very close to
> zero (such as 1.2e-7), Bro will write "0" to a JSON log.
> _______________________________________________
> bro-dev mailing list
> bro-dev at bro.org
> http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/pipermail/bro-dev/attachments/20171106/667c6c4a/attachment.html 

More information about the bro-dev mailing list