Search Results

Search found 2076 results on 84 pages for 'as keyword'.

Page 1/84 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Keyword Selector Tools - Choosing the Best Tool For Your Keyword Research

    Keyword selector tools are crucial in being able to locate keywords and keyword phrases which, if used wisely, will increase traffic to a site. Increased traffic generally means increased profits so it is important to pick the keyword research tool that best suits your needs. However the choice of tools is vast. Some are free, some cost a one off fee whilst others require a monthly subscription. This article gives tips and ideas to consider when choosing a keyword selector tool.

    Read the article

  • Keyword Research - Introducing Keyword Research

    What is keyword research? Let us start by saying that keywords are the words and phrases that people type into search engine search boxes to get information to solve their problems or to find out information about their interests. Keyword research is the art of finding out what these keywords are so that you can optimize your marketing or websites for them to get some of the search traffic from these search engines. The better your keyword research is the better as you can optimize your website or marketing to find those hungry buyers for your products and/or services.

    Read the article

  • Create Keyword Object Perl Microsoft::AdCenter

    - by toobsco42
    So I looked at the perldoc for the Microsoft::AdCenter module and it shows this as an example of how to create a keyword object: ~$ perldoc Microsoft::AdCenter #Create a Keyword object my $keyword = Microsoft::AdCenter::V7::CampaignManagementService::Keyword->new ->Text("some text") ->BroadMatchBid(Microsoft::AdCenter::V7::CampaignManagementService::Bid->new->Amount(0.1)) ->ExactMatchBid(Microsoft::AdCenter::V7::CampaignManagementService::Bid->new->Amount(0.1)); However, doesn't this violate the new policy of using only one match type per keyword? Campaign Management changes: "Previously, you would create a single Keyword object and specify a bid value for each match that you wanted to bid on (for example, exact match or phrase match). If you did not specify a bid value at the keyword-level, adCenter used the default bid value specified at the ad group level. Now, you must create a Keyword object for each match type that you want to bid on. For example, to bid on the keyword car by using exact match and phrase match, create a Keyword object and set the Text element to car and the ExactMatchBid element to a bid amount. Then, create a second Keyword object and set the Text element to car and PhraseMatchBid to a bid amount. When you add the keywords, you’ll get a unique keyword ID for each keyword and match-type combination."

    Read the article

  • A Great Keyword Research Tip - How to Do the Right Keyword Research

    There are many different kinds of affiliate marketing advice being thrown out by different Internet marketing experts. They claim that it will lead to affiliate success. Most will say that an appropriate website for a certain target market would do the trick. The usual barometer, of course, is the Google ranking (these show the website traffic)-however, these hardly translate to a high amount of sales.

    Read the article

  • Keyword Research - Four Key Criteria For Selecting "Money" Keywords

    Keyword research is absolutely essential to the success of any website because keywords are what people use to find websites and are what search engines use as the basis for their rankings. Good keyword research increases the probability that search engines will rank the pages on your website high for your target keyword; and bad keyword research (which often means no keyword research) will doom your website to the search engine cellars.

    Read the article

  • Check keyword popularity of 2000 phrases?

    - by Mark
    I just found a list of about 2000 car manufacturers which I want to put into a drop-down list... but 2000 is probably a bit too many, so I want to filter it down to maybe the top 100 most popular cars. I figure I can just use Google search popularity to give me a rough estimate of how popular the car is... but I can't find a tool that will let me query 2000 keywords. Anyone know of one?

    Read the article

  • C# - Disable Dynamic Keyword

    - by chief7
    Is there any way to disable the use of the "dynamic" keyword in .net 4? I thought the Code Analysis feature of VS2010 might have a rule to fail the build if the dynamic keyword is used but I couldn't fine one.

    Read the article

  • Scala: "using" keyword

    - by Albert Cenkier
    i've defined 'using' keyword as following: def using[A, B <: {def close(): Unit}] (closeable: B) (f: B => A): A = try { f(closeable) } finally { closeable.close() } i can use it like that: using(new PrintWriter("sample.txt")){ out => out.println("hellow world!") } now i'm curious how to define 'using' keyword to take any number of parameters, and be able to access them separately: using(new BufferedReader(new FileReader("in.txt")), new PrintWriter("out.txt")){ (in, out) => out.println(in.readLIne) }

    Read the article

  • Free Content For Websites - Choosing Keyword Phrases to Insert

    The way to use keyword phrases in your free website content is to start by selecting a single keyword phrase that best describes what your website stands for. You should then focus on this keyword phrase and other related synonyms. Using the tool I usually use for this exercise, you can get dozens of similar keyword phrases.

    Read the article

  • Why is the 'this' keyword not a reference type in C++ [closed]

    - by Dave Tapley
    Possible Duplicates: Why ‘this’ is a pointer and not a reference? SAFE Pointer to a pointer (well reference to a reference) in C# The this keyword in C++ gets a pointer to the object I currently am. My question is why is the type of this a pointer type and not a reference type. Are there any conditions under which the this keyword would be NULL? My immediate thought would be in a static function, but Visual C++ at least is smart enough to spot this and report static member functions do not have 'this' pointers. Is this in the standard?

    Read the article

  • SEO and Spelling mistakes in keyword

    - by Sushil
    I am about to register a domain name (suppose) someone.com (with proper spelling), in mind targeting the keyword "SOMEONE". But then I discovered on 'google keyword research tool' that not this but a typo "SOME1" seems to be more popular and people search this significantly more often than the proper keyword. And luckily someone.com and some1.com both are available. I understand that I can register both the domains, but I don't know on which should I keep my website and redirect the other one. Should I make the typo "some1.com" my base site? But that's a typo. P.S., my site has a totally relevant content and not just keyword targeted worthless site. What do you guys suggest? I am confused. How would that affect my SEO ranking?? EDIT: Because the competition for the keyword I am targeting is fairly low, I think nevertheless whatever domain I choose, it will appear on the search engine first page.

    Read the article

  • Java method keyword "final" and its use

    - by Lukas Eder
    When I create complex type hierarchies (several levels, several types per level), I like to use the final keyword on methods implementing some interface declaration. An example: interface Garble { int zork(); } interface Gnarf extends Garble { /** * This is the same as calling {@link #zblah(0)} */ int zblah(); int zblah(int defaultZblah); } And then abstract class AbstractGarble implements Garble { @Override public final int zork() { ... } } abstract class AbstractGnarf extends AbstractGarble implements Gnarf { // Here I absolutely want to fix the default behaviour of zblah // No Gnarf shouldn't be allowed to set 1 as the default, for instance @Override public final int zblah() { return zblah(0); } // This method is not implemented here, but in a subclass @Override public abstract int zblah(int defaultZblah); } I do this for several reasons: It helps me develop the type hierarchy. When I add a class to the hierarchy, it is very clear, what methods I have to implement, and what methods I may not override (in case I forgot the details about the hierarchy) I think overriding concrete stuff is bad according to design principles and patterns, such as the template method pattern. I don't want other developers or my users do it. So the final keyword works perfectly for me. My question is: Why is it used so rarely in the wild? Can you show me some examples / reasons where final (in a similar case to mine) would be very bad?

    Read the article

  • Purpose of "new" keyword

    - by Channel72
    The new keyword in languages like Java, Javascript, and C# creates a new instance of a class. This syntax seems to have been inherited from C++, where new is used specifically to allocate a new instance of a class on the heap, and return a pointer to the new instance. In C++, this is not the only way to construct an object. You can also construct an object on the stack, without using new - and in fact, this way of constructing objects is much more common in C++. So, coming from a C++ background, the new keyword in languages like Java, Javascript, and C# seemed natural and obvious to me. Then I started to learn Python, which doesn't have the new keyword. In Python, an instance is constructed simply by calling the constructor, like: f = Foo() At first, this seemed a bit off to me, until it occurred to me that there's no reason for Python to have new, because everything is an object so there's no need to disambiguate between various constructor syntaxes. But then I thought - what's really the point of new in Java? Why should we say Object o = new Object();? Why not just Object o = Object();? In C++ there's definitely a need for new, since we need to distinguish between allocating on the heap and allocating on the stack, but in Java all objects are constructed on the heap, so why even have the new keyword? The same question could be asked for Javascript. In C#, which I'm much less familiar with, I think new may have some purpose in terms of distinguishing between object types and value types, but I'm not sure. Regardless, it seems to me that many languages which came after C++ simply "inherited" the new keyword - without really needing it. It's almost like a vestigial keyword. We don't seem to need it for any reason, and yet it's there. Question: Am I correct about this? Or is there some compelling reason that new needs to be in C++-inspired memory-managed languages like Java, Javascript and C#?

    Read the article

  • C# memory management: unsafe keyword and pointers

    - by Alerty
    What are the consequences (positive/negative) of using the unsafe keyword in C# to use pointers? For example, what becomes of garbage collection, what are the performance gains/losses, what are the performance gains/losses compared to other languages manual memory management, what are the dangers, in which situation is it really justifiable to make use of this language feature... ?

    Read the article

  • Keyword search on all columns of multiple tables in sql server

    - by hiralshah
    Dear all, We are maintaining the profile information’s (like profile first name, last name, address, city, state, age, religion, occupation, education, etc….) from tbl_profie table in sql server. The users can search profiles using any keywords like Example 1: MBBS, Delhi, India Example 2: MBA, Delhi, cricket Example 3 : London, Hindu Tbl_profile table defending some parent table like Tbl_city, Tbl_state, Tbl_country, Tbl_occupation, Tbl_education tables, etc. So how to fetch user search results from Tbl_profile and profiles related tables using user’s keyword with easiest way.

    Read the article

  • The C++ 'new' keyword and C

    - by Florian
    In a C header file of a library I'm using one of the variables is named 'new'. Unfortunately, I'm using this library in a C++ project and the occurence of 'new' as a variable names freaks out the compiler. I'm already using extern "C" { #include<... }, but that doesn't seem to help in this respect. Do I have to aks the library developer to change the name of that variable even though from his perspective, as a C developer, the code is absolutely fine, as 'new' is not a C keyword?

    Read the article

  • C++ Little Wonders: The C++11 auto keyword redux

    - by James Michael Hare
    I’ve decided to create a sub-series of my Little Wonders posts to focus on C++.  Just like their C# counterparts, these posts will focus on those features of the C++ language that can help improve code by making it easier to write and maintain.  The index of the C# Little Wonders can be found here. This has been a busy week with a rollout of some new website features here at my work, so I don’t have a big post for this week.  But I wanted to write something up, and since lately I’ve been renewing my C++ skills in a separate project, it seemed like a good opportunity to start a C++ Little Wonders series.  Most of my development work still tends to focus on C#, but it was great to get back into the saddle and renew my C++ knowledge.  Today I’m going to focus on a new feature in C++11 (formerly known as C++0x, which is a major move forward in the C++ language standard).  While this small keyword can seem so trivial, I feel it is a big step forward in improving readability in C++ programs. The auto keyword If you’ve worked on C++ for a long time, you probably have some passing familiarity with the old auto keyword as one of those rarely used C++ keywords that was almost never used because it was the default. That is, in the code below (before C++11): 1: int foo() 2: { 3: // automatic variables (allocated and deallocated on stack) 4: int x; 5: auto int y; 6:  7: // static variables (retain their value across calls) 8: static int z; 9:  10: return 0; 11: } The variable x is assumed to be auto because that is the default, thus it is unnecessary to specify it explicitly as in the declaration of y below that.  Basically, an auto variable is one that is allocated and de-allocated on the stack automatically.  Contrast this to static variables, that are allocated statically and exist across the lifetime of the program. Because auto was so rarely (if ever) used since it is the norm, they decided to remove it for this purpose and give it new meaning in C++11.  The new meaning of auto: implicit typing Now, if your compiler supports C++ 11 (or at least a good subset of C++11 or 0x) you can take advantage of type inference in C++.  For those of you from the C# world, this means that the auto keyword in C++ now behaves a lot like the var keyword in C#! For example, many of us have had to declare those massive type declarations for an iterator before.  Let’s say we have a std::map of std::string to int which will map names to ages: 1: std::map<std::string, int> myMap; And then let’s say we want to find the age of a given person: 1: // Egad that's a long type... 2: std::map<std::string, int>::const_iterator pos = myMap.find(targetName); Notice that big ugly type definition to declare variable pos?  Sure, we could shorten this by creating a typedef of our specific map type if we wanted, but now with the auto keyword there’s no need: 1: // much shorter! 2: auto pos = myMap.find(targetName); The auto now tells the compiler to determine what type pos should be based on what it’s being assigned to.  This is not dynamic typing, it still determines the type as if it were explicitly declared and once declared that type cannot be changed.  That is, this is invalid: 1: // x is type int 2: auto x = 42; 3:  4: // can't assign string to int 5: x = "Hello"; Once the compiler determines x is type int it is exactly as if we typed int x = 42; instead, so don’t' confuse it with dynamic typing, it’s still very type-safe. An interesting feature of the auto keyword is that you can modify the inferred type: 1: // declare method that returns int* 2: int* GetPointer(); 3:  4: // p1 is int*, auto inferred type is int 5: auto *p1 = GetPointer(); 6:  7: // ps is int*, auto inferred type is int* 8: auto p2 = GetPointer(); Notice in both of these cases, p1 and p2 are determined to be int* but in each case the inferred type was different.  because we declared p1 as auto *p1 and GetPointer() returns int*, it inferred the type int was needed to complete the declaration.  In the second case, however, we declared p2 as auto p2 which means the inferred type was int*.  Ultimately, this make p1 and p2 the same type, but which type is inferred makes a difference, if you are chaining multiple inferred declarations together.  In these cases, the inferred type of each must match the first: 1: // Type inferred is int 2: // p1 is int* 3: // p2 is int 4: // p3 is int& 5: auto *p1 = GetPointer(), p2 = 42, &p3 = p2; Note that this works because the inferred type was int, if the inferred type was int* instead: 1: // syntax error, p1 was inferred to be int* so p2 and p3 don't make sense 2: auto p1 = GetPointer(), p2 = 42, &p3 = p2; You could also use const or static to modify the inferred type: 1: // inferred type is an int, theAnswer is a const int 2: const auto theAnswer = 42; 3:  4: // inferred type is double, Pi is a static double 5: static auto Pi = 3.1415927; Thus in the examples above it inferred the types int and double respectively, which were then modified to const and static. Summary The auto keyword has gotten new life in C++11 to allow you to infer the type of a variable from it’s initialization.  This simple little keyword can be used to cut down large declarations for complex types into a much more readable form, where appropriate.   Technorati Tags: C++, C++11, Little Wonders, auto

    Read the article

  • Keyword to SQL search

    - by jdelator
    Use Case When a user goes to my website, they will be confronted with a search box much like SO. They can search for results using plan text. ".net questions", "closed questions", ".net and java", etc.. The search will function a bit different that SO, in that it will try to as much as possible of the schema of the database rather than a straight fulltext search. So ".net questions" will only search for .net questions as opposed to .net answers (probably not applicable to SO case, just an example here), "closed questions" will return questions that are closed, ".net and java" questions will return questions that relate to .net and java and nothing else. Problem I'm not too familiar with the words but I basically want to do a keyword to SQL driven search. I know the schema of the database and I also can datamine the database. I want to know any current approaches there that existing out already before I try to implement this. I guess this question is for what is a good design for the stated problem. Proposed My proposed solution so far looks something like this Clean the input. Just remove any special characters Parse the input into chunks of data. Break an input of "c# java" into c# and java Also handle the special cases like "'c# java' questions" into 'c# java' and "questions". Build a tree out of the input Bind the data into metadata. So convert stuff like closed questions and relate it to the isclosed column of a table. Convert the tree into a sql query. Thoughts/suggestions/links?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >