[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100414232315.GA3503@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 03:23:15 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: rule with multi symbols
On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 08:17:51PM +0200, Magnum, P.I. wrote:
> On 04/14/2010 06:50 PM, Magnum, P.I. wrote:
> >Az,[!@&(], A0,\p0[!@&(],
>
> On second thought, it's better written
>
> Az,[!@&(], A0,\0,
>
> even though my previous answer does work too. It will end up the same as
> long as the \p0 range is identical to the range refered to, if I
> understand it right. Anyway this simpler rule might be a tad quicker.
> That's just a guess though.
It is cleaner, but it is not any quicker - and strictly speaking neither
is a rule - they're preprocessor expressions that result in the exact
same sets of four rules each (which is why the speed stays the same).
However, this is quicker (commands re-ordered):
A0,[!@&(], Az,\0,
And this is quicker yet (simpler commands):
^[!@&(] $\0
Alexander
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.
