Search Results

Search found 39473 results on 1579 pages for 'johny why'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 381/1579 | < Previous Page | 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388  | Next Page >

  • Why hashCode() returns the same value for a object in all consecutive executions?

    - by Vijay Shanker
    Hi, I am trying some code around object equality in java. As I have read somewhere hashCode() is a number which is generated by applying the hash function. Hash Function can be different for each object but can also be same. At the object level, it returns the memory address of the object. Now, I have sample program, which I run 10 times, consecutively. Every time i run the program I get the same value as hash code. If hashCode() function returns the memory location for the object, how come the java(JVM) store the object at same memory address in the consecutive runs? Can you please give me some insight and your view over this issue?

    Read the article

  • why winform using external dll(VC) and ocx(VC) control can only import one?

    - by jack
    we have a .net framework application with a vc dll and a vc ocx, and now if we only import one dll ,it is ok, but when we import both, it will pop a messagebox saying: Debug Assertion Failed! and i studied the child module of our application that import the vc dll, i found after the framework import vc ocx and initialize , then the function LoadLibrary in our module importing the vc dll would return 0, that means memory limited or call improperly, i use getlasterror() the error code is 1114. so it is very frustrated ,hope someone can help me.

    Read the article

  • Why does Application_Deactivated not get called on a pivot page?

    - by willmel
    For my Windows Phone 7 app, I have a main panorama page which opens up into a pivot control. The main panorama page correctly calls Activated/Deactivated, and restores correctly. But after visiting the pivot page, pressing the Windows key doesn't call Deactivated. When the app is relaunched with the back button, it goes right to how the page looked before tombstoning, but Activated is not called, and the page is not usable, and the back key doesn't work. Has anyone else experienced this problem before?

    Read the article

  • Why does gcc warn about incompatible struct assignment with a `self = [super initDesignatedInit];' c

    - by gavinbeatty
    I have the following base/derived class setup in Objective-C: @interface ASCIICodeBase : NSObject { @protected char code_[4]; } - (Base *)initWithASCIICode:(const char *)code; @end @implementation ASCIICodeBase - (ASCIICodeBase *)initWithCode:(const char *)code len:(size_t)len { if (len == 0 || len > 3) { return nil; } if (self = [super init]) { memset(code_, 0, 4); strncpy(code_, code, 3); } return self; } @end @interface CountryCode : ASCIICodeBase - (CountryCode *)initWithCode:(const char *)code; @end @implementation CountryCode - (CountryCode *)initWithCode:(const char *)code { size_t len = strlen(code); if (len != 2) { return nil; } self = [super initWithCode:code len:len]; // here return self; } @end On the line marked "here", I get the following gcc warning: warning: incompatible Objective-C types assigning 'struct ASCIICodeBase *', expected 'struct CurrencyCode *' Is there something wrong with this code or should I have the ASCIICodeBase return id? Or maybe use a cast on the "here" line?

    Read the article

  • Why $(":select").focus does not work while $(":input").focus works?

    - by user605660
    Hi. I have a JQuery code which does something when input or select elements get focus. Although my code for input element works, select element does not work. Here is what I do. <body> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://code.jquery.com/jquery-latest.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function(){ $(":input").focus(function () { //this works //do something }); $(":select").focus(function () { //this doesn't //do something }); }); </script> </body> I tried some variation on select, such as using $("select") instead of $(":select"), but did not work either. I am a beginner for JQuery. I appreciate if you could tell me how I can make it work. Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • jQuery: click() function doesn't work on the <a> element.. why ?

    - by Patrick
    hi, I cannot trigger this click on this element $(this).find('.views-field-field-cover-fid').find('a.imagecache-coverimage').click(); The jQuery path is correct. Indeed if I print it, it gives the correct a element: console.log($(this).find('.views-field-field-cover-fid').find('a.imagecache-coverimage')); But for some reason the function click() doesn't work on it. thanks

    Read the article

  • Why do dicts of defaultdict(int)'s use so much memory? (and other simple python performance question

    - by dukhat
    import numpy as num from collections import defaultdict topKeys = range(16384) keys = range(8192) table = dict((k,defaultdict(int)) for k in topKeys) dat = num.zeros((16384,8192), dtype="int32") print "looping begins" #how much memory should this use? I think it shouldn't use more that a few #times the memory required to hold (16384*8192) int32's (512 mb), but #it uses 11 GB! for k in topKeys: for j in keys: dat[k,j] = table[k][j] print "done" What is going on here? Furthermore, this similar script takes eons to run compared to the first one, and also uses an absurd quantity of memory. topKeys = range(16384) keys = range(8192) table = [(j,0) for k in topKeys for j in keys] I guess python ints might be 64 bit ints, which would account for some of this, but do these relatively natural and simple constructions really produce such a massive overhead? I guess these scripts show that they do, so my question is: what exactly is causing the high memory usage in the first script and the long runtime and high memory usage of the second script and is there any way to avoid these costs?

    Read the article

  • What will be the output of this program? And why?

    - by Mac
    I came across a good example written below: class Test { private: int m_iX; public: Test(void): m_iX(0) { } ~Test(void) { } void Show() { printf("Hello World"); } }; int main() { Test* pTemp = NULL; pTemp->Show(); return 0; } But, what does this code mean and do? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why does Java automatically decode %2F in URI encoded filenames?

    - by Lucas
    I have a java servlet that needs to write out files that have a user-configurable name. I am trying to use URI encoding to properly escape special characters, but the JRE appears to automatically convert encoded forward slashes (%2F) into path separators. Example: File dir = new File("C:\Documents and Setting\username\temp"); String fn = "Top 1/2.pdf"; URI uri = new URI( dir.toURI().toASCIIString() + URLEncoder.encoder( fn, "UTF-8" ).toString() ); File out = new File( uri ); System.out.println( dir.toURI().toASCIIString() ); System.out.println( URLEncoder.encoder( fn, "UTF-8" ).toString() ); System.out.println( uri.toASCIIString() ); System.out.println( output.toURI().toASCIIString() ); The output is: file:/C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/username/temp/ Top+1%2F2.pdf file:/C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/username/temp/Top+1%2F2.pdf file:/C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/username/temp/Top+1/2.pdf After the new File object is instantiated, the %2F sequence is automatically converted to a forward slash and I end up with an incorrect path. Does anybody know the proper way to approach this issue? The core of the problem seems to be that uri.equals( new File(uri).toURI() ) == FALSE when there is a '%2F' in the URI. I'm planning to just use the URLEncoded string verbatim rather than trying to use the File(uri) constructor.

    Read the article

  • Why is there a large gap between Begin PreRenderComplete and End PreRenderComplete on my page?

    - by Middletone
    I'd like to know what can cause this kind of disparity between the begin and end PreRendercomplete events or how I migh go about locating the bottleneck. aspx.page End PreRender 0.193179639923915 0.001543 aspx.page Begin PreRenderComplete 0.193206263076064 0.000027 aspx.page End PreRenderComplete 1.96926008935549 1.776054 aspx.page Begin SaveState 2.13108461902679 0.161825

    Read the article

  • Since upgrading to Solaris 11, my ARC size has consistently targeted 119MB, despite having 30GB RAM. What? Why?

    - by growse
    I ran a NAS/SAN box on Solaris 11 Express before Solaris 11 was released. The box is an HP X1600 with an attached D2700. In all, 12x 1TB 7200 SATA disks, 12x 300GB 10k SAS disks in separate zpools. Total RAM is 30GB. Services provided are CIFS, NFS and iSCSI. All was well, and I had a ZFS memory usage graph looking like this: A fairly healthy Arc size of around 23GB - making use of the available memory for caching. However, I then upgraded to Solaris 11 when that came out. Now, my graph looks like this: Partial output of arc_summary.pl is: System Memory: Physical RAM: 30701 MB Free Memory : 26719 MB LotsFree: 479 MB ZFS Tunables (/etc/system): ARC Size: Current Size: 915 MB (arcsize) Target Size (Adaptive): 119 MB (c) Min Size (Hard Limit): 64 MB (zfs_arc_min) Max Size (Hard Limit): 29677 MB (zfs_arc_max) It's targetting 119MB while sitting at 915MB. It's got 30GB to play with. Why? Did they change something? Edit To clarify, arc_summary.pl is Ben Rockwood's, and the relevent lines generating the above stats are: my $mru_size = ${Kstat}->{zfs}->{0}->{arcstats}->{p}; my $target_size = ${Kstat}->{zfs}->{0}->{arcstats}->{c}; my $arc_min_size = ${Kstat}->{zfs}->{0}->{arcstats}->{c_min}; my $arc_max_size = ${Kstat}->{zfs}->{0}->{arcstats}->{c_max}; my $arc_size = ${Kstat}->{zfs}->{0}->{arcstats}->{size}; The Kstat entries are there, I'm just getting odd values out of them. Edit 2 I've just re-measured the arc size with arc_summary.pl - I've verified these numbers with kstat: System Memory: Physical RAM: 30701 MB Free Memory : 26697 MB LotsFree: 479 MB ZFS Tunables (/etc/system): ARC Size: Current Size: 744 MB (arcsize) Target Size (Adaptive): 119 MB (c) Min Size (Hard Limit): 64 MB (zfs_arc_min) Max Size (Hard Limit): 29677 MB (zfs_arc_max) The thing that strikes me is that the Target Size is 119MB. Looking at the graph, it's targeted the exact same value (124.91M according to cacti, 119M according to arc_summary.pl - think the difference is just 1024/1000 rounding issues) ever since Solaris 11 was installed. It looks like the kernel's making zero effort to shift the target size to anything different. The current size is fluctuating as the needs of the system (large) fight with the target size, and it appears equilibrium is between 700 and 1000MB. So the question is now a little more pointed - why is Solaris 11 hard setting my ARC target size to 119MB, and how do I change it? Should I raise the min size to see what happens? I've stuck the output of kstat -n arcstats over at http://pastebin.com/WHPimhfg Edit 3 Ok, weirdness now. I know flibflob mentioned that there was a patch to fix this. I haven't applied this patch yet (still sorting out internal support issues) and I've not applied any other software updates. Last thursday, the box crashed. As in, completely stopped responding to everything. When I rebooted it, it came back up fine, but here's what my graph now looks like. It seems to have fixed the problem. This is proper la la land stuff now. I've literally no idea what's going on. :(

    Read the article

  • Do You Know How OUM defines the four, basic types of business system testing performed on a project? Why not test your knowledge?

    - by user713452
    Testing is perhaps the most important process in the Oracle® Unified Method (OUM). That makes it all the more important for practitioners to have a common understanding of the various types of functional testing referenced in the method, and to use the proper terminology when communicating with each other about testing activities. OUM identifies four basic types of functional testing, which is sometimes referred to as business system testing.  The basic functional testing types referenced by OUM include: Unit Testing Integration Testing System Testing, and  Systems Integration Testing See if you can match the following definitions with the appropriate type above? A.  This type of functional testing is focused on verifying that interfaces/integration between the system being implemented (i.e. System under Discussion (SuD)) and external systems functions as expected. B.     This type of functional testing is performed for custom software components only, is typically performed by the developer of the custom software, and is focused on verifying that the several custom components developed to satisfy a given requirement (e.g. screen, program, report, etc.) interact with one another as designed. C.  This type of functional testing is focused on verifying that the functionality within the system being implemented (i.e. System under Discussion (SuD)), functions as expected.  This includes out-of-the -box functionality delivered with Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS) applications, as well as, any custom components developed to address gaps in functionality.  D.  This type of functional testing is performed for custom software components only, is typically performed by the developer of the custom software, and is focused on verifying that the individual custom components developed to satisfy a given requirement  (e.g. screen, program, report, etc.) functions as designed.   Check your answers below: (D) (B) (C) (A) If you matched all of the functional testing types to their definitions correctly, then congratulations!  If not, you can find more information in the Testing Process Overview and Testing Task Overviews in the OUM Method Pack.

    Read the article

  • Introducing functional programming constructs in non-functional programming languages

    - by Giorgio
    This question has been going through my mind quite a lot lately and since I haven't found a convincing answer to it I would like to know if other users of this site have thought about it as well. In the recent years, even though OOP is still the most popular programming paradigm, functional programming is getting a lot of attention. I have only used OOP languages for my work (C++ and Java) but I am trying to learn some FP in my free time because I find it very interesting. So, I started learning Haskell three years ago and Scala last summer. I plan to learn some SML and Caml as well, and to brush up my (little) knowledge of Scheme. Well, a lot of plans (too ambitious?) but I hope I will find the time to learn at least the basics of FP during the next few years. What is important for me is how functional programming works and how / whether I can use it for some real projects. I have already developed small tools in Haskell. In spite of my strong interest for FP, I find it difficult to understand why functional programming constructs are being added to languages like C#, Java, C++, and so on. As a developer interested in FP, I find it more natural to use, say, Scala or Haskell, instead of waiting for the next FP feature to be added to my favourite non-FP language. In other words, why would I want to have only some FP in my originally non-FP language instead of looking for a language that has a better support for FP? For example, why should I be interested to have lambdas in Java if I can switch to Scala where I have much more FP concepts and access all the Java libraries anyway? Similarly: why do some FP in C# instead of using F# (to my knowledge, C# and F# can work together)? Java was designed to be OO. Fine. I can do OOP in Java (and I would like to keep using Java in that way). Scala was designed to support OOP + FP. Fine: I can use a mix of OOP and FP in Scala. Haskell was designed for FP: I can do FP in Haskell. If I need to tune the performance of a particular module, I can interface Haskell with some external routines in C. But why would I want to do OOP with just some basic FP in Java? So, my main point is: why are non-functional programming languages being extended with some functional concept? Shouldn't it be more comfortable (interesting, exciting, productive) to program in a language that has been designed from the very beginning to be functional or multi-paradigm? Don't different programming paradigms integrate better in a language that was designed for it than in a language in which one paradigm was only added later? The first explanation I could think of is that, since FP is a new concept (it isn't new at all, but it is new for many developers), it needs to be introduced gradually. However, I remember my switch from imperative to OOP: when I started to program in C++ (coming from Pascal and C) I really had to rethink the way in which I was coding, and to do it pretty fast. It was not gradual. So, this does not seem to be a good explanation to me. Or can it be that many non-FP programmers are not really interested in understanding and using functional programming, but they find it practically convenient to adopt certain FP-idioms in their non-FP language? IMPORTANT NOTE Just in case (because I have seen several language wars on this site): I mentioned the languages I know better, this question is in no way meant to start comparisons between different programming languages to decide which is better / worse. Also, I am not interested in a comparison of OOP versus FP (pros and cons). The point I am interested in is to understand why FP is being introduced one bit at a time into existing languages that were not designed for it even though there exist languages that were / are specifically designed to support FP.

    Read the article

  • Why is my machine unable to mount my SMB drives ("CIFS VFS: Error connecting to socket. Aborting operation", return code -115)?

    - by downbeat
    I have a machine running Precise (12.04 x64), and I cannot mount my SMB drives (I have 3, we'll call them public, private and download). It used to work (a week or two ago) and I didn't touch fstab! The machine hosting the shares is a commercial NAS, and I'm not seeing anything that would indicate it's an issue with the NAS. I have an older machine which I updated to Precise at the same time (both fresh installed, not dist-upgrade), so should have a very similar configuration. It is not having any problems. I am not having problems on windows machines/partitions either, only one of my Precise machines. The two machines are using identical entries in fstab and identical /etc/samba/smb.conf files. I don't think I've ever changed smb.conf (has never mattered before). My fstab entries all basically look like this: //10.1.1.111/public /media/public cifs credentials=/home/downbeat/.credentials,iocharset=utf8,uid=downbeat,gid=downbeat,file_mode=0644,dir_mode=0755 0 0 Here's the dmesg output on boot: [ 51.162198] CIFS VFS: Error connecting to socket. Aborting operation [ 51.162369] CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -115 [ 51.194106] CIFS VFS: Error connecting to socket. Aborting operation [ 51.194250] CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -115 [ 51.198120] CIFS VFS: Error connecting to socket. Aborting operation [ 51.198243] CIFS VFS: cifs_mount failed w/return code = -115 There are no other errors I see in the dmesg output. Originally when I ran 'testparm -s', the output contained these lines ERROR: lock directory /var/run/samba does not exist ERROR: pid directory /var/run/samba does not exist Here's the samba related programs I have installed: $ dpkg --list|grep -i samba ii libpam-winbind 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 Samba nameservice and authentication integration plugins ii libwbclient0 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 Samba winbind client library ii nautilus-share 0.7.3-1ubuntu2 Nautilus extension to share folder using Samba ii python-smbc 1.0.13-0ubuntu1 Python bindings for Samba clients (libsmbclient) ii samba-common 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 common files used by both the Samba server and client ii samba-common-bin 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 common files used by both the Samba server and client ii winbind 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 Samba nameservice integration server $ dpkg --list|grep -i smb ii dmidecode 2.11-4 SMBIOS/DMI table decoder ii libsmbclient 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 shared library for communication with SMB/CIFS servers ii python-smbc 1.0.13-0ubuntu1 Python bindings for Samba clients (libsmbclient) ii smbclient 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 command-line SMB/CIFS clients for Unix ii smbfs 2:5.1-1ubuntu1 Common Internet File System utilities - compatibility package $ dpkg --list|grep -i cifs ii cifs-utils 2:5.1-1ubuntu1 Common Internet File System utilities ii libsmbclient 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 shared library for communication with SMB/CIFS servers ii smbclient 2:3.6.3-2ubuntu2.3 command-line SMB/CIFS clients for Unix I originally noticed that my other machine had "libpam-winbind" and "nautilus-share" installed and the machine with the issue did not. Installing those two packages solved my errors with 'testparm -s', but did not fix my issue. Finally, I tried to purge and reinstall these packages smbclient smbfs cifs-utils samba-common samba-common-bin Still no luck. Again, it used to work; now it doesn't. Very similarly configured machine works (but some packages are out of date on the working machine). The NAS has only one interface/IP address, nmblookup works to find it's IP from it's hostname (from the machine with the issue) and it responds to a ping. Please any help would be great. I've been searching on AskUbuntu, SuperUser, ubuntuforums and plain old search engines for a week now and it's driving me crazy!

    Read the article

  • Functional programming constructs in non-functional programming languages

    - by Giorgio
    This question has been going through my mind quite a lot lately and since I haven't found a convincing answer to it I would like to know if other users of this site have thought about it as well. In the recent years, even though OOP is still the most popular programming paradigm, functional programming is getting a lot of attention. I have only used OOP languages for my work (C++ and Java) but I am trying to learn some FP in my free time because I find it very interesting. So, I started learning Haskell three years ago and Scala last summer. I plan to learn some SML and Caml as well, and to brush up my (little) knowledge of Scheme. Well, a lot of plans (too ambitious?) but I hope I will find the time to learn at least the basics of FP during the next few years. What is important for me is how functional programming works and how / whether I can use it for some real projects. I have already developed small tools in Haskell. In spite of my strong interest for FP, I find it difficult to understand why functional programming constructs are being added to languages like C#, Java, C++, and so on. As a developer interested in FP, I find it more natural to use, say, Scala or Haskell, instead of waiting for the next FP feature to be added to my favourite non-FP language. In other words, why would I want to have only some FP in my originally non-FP language instead of looking for a language that has a better support for FP? For example, why should I be interested to have lambdas in Java if I can switch to Scala where I have much more FP concepts and access all the Java libraries anyway? Similarly: why do some FP in C# instead of using F# (to my knowledge, C# and F# can work together)? Java was designed to be OO. Fine. I can do OOP in Java (and I would like to keep using Java in that way). Scala was designed to support OOP + FP. Fine: I can use a mix of OOP and FP in Scala. Haskell was designed for FP: I can do FP in Haskell. If I need to tune the performance of a particular module, I can interface Haskell with some external routines in C. But why would I want to do OOP with just some basic FP in Java? So, my main point is: why are non-functional programming languages being extended with some functional concept? Shouldn't it be more comfortable (interesting, exciting, productive) to program in a language that has been designed from the very beginning to be functional or multi-paradigm? Don't different programming paradigms integrate better in a language that was designed for it than in a language in which one paradigm was only added later? The first explanation I could think of is that, since FP is a new concept (it isn't new at all, but it is new for many developers), it needs to be introduced gradually. However, I remember my switch from imperative to OOP: when I started to program in C++ (coming from Pascal and C) I really had to rethink the way in which I was coding, and to do it pretty fast. It was not gradual. So, this does not seem to be a good explanation to me. Also, I asked myself if my impression is just plainly wrong due to lack of knowledge. E.g., do C# and C++11 support FP as extensively as, say, Scala or Caml do? In this case, my question would be simply non-existent. Or can it be that many non-FP programmers are not really interested in using functional programming, but they find it practically convenient to adopt certain FP-idioms in their non-FP language? IMPORTANT NOTE Just in case (because I have seen several language wars on this site): I mentioned the languages I know better, this question is in no way meant to start comparisons between different programming languages to decide which is better / worse. Also, I am not interested in a comparison of OOP versus FP (pros and cons). The point I am interested in is to understand why FP is being introduced one bit at a time into existing languages that were not designed for it even though there exist languages that were / are specifically designed to support FP.

    Read the article

  • Differentiate procedural language(c) from oop languages(c++)

    - by niko
    I have been trying to differentiate c and c++(or oop languages) but I don't understand where the difference is. Note I have never used c++ but I asked my friends and some of them to differentiate c and c++ They say c++ has oop concepts and also the public, private modes for definition of variables and which c does not have though. Seriously I have done vb.net programming for a while 2 to 3 months, I never faced a situation to use class concepts and modes of definition like public and private. So I thought what could be the use for these? My friend explained me a program saying that if a variable is public, it can be accessed anywhere I said why not declare it as a global variable like in c? He did not get back to my question and he said if a variable is private it cannot be accessed by some other functions I said why not define it as a local variable, even these he was unable to answer. No matter where I read private variables cannot be accessed whereas public variables can be then why not make public as global and private as local whats the difference? whats the real use of public and private ? please don't say it can be used by everyone, I suppose why not we use some conditions and make the calls? I have heard people saying security reasons, a friend said if a function need to be accessed it should be inherited first. He explained saying that only admin should be able to have some rights and not all so that functions are made private and inherited only by the admin to use Then I said why not we use if condition if ( login == "admin") invoke the function he still did not answer these question. Please clear me with these things, I have done vb.net and vba and little c++ without using oop concepts because I never found their real use while I was writing the code, I'm a little afraid am I too back in oop concepts?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388  | Next Page >