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@illinois.edu> wrote:
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@bro.org
http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev