Search Results

Search found 42923 results on 1717 pages for 'google search api'.

Page 10/1717 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • Why does Google Chrome ignore "last_known_google_url" property in "Local State" file?

    - by Peter Sivák
    I want to force my Google Chrome web browser (version 21.0.1180.89, 64-bit) to use non-localized search (thus google in english) through address bar, using the default Google search engine. To achieve that, I have to change value of the property last_known_google_url to https://www.google.com/?hl=en& in Local State file (for instance on Linux, the full path to the file is ~/.config/google-chrome/Local State). In that file, there should be the property: "browser": { "last_known_google_url": but it is not. Even if I add there the property, it has no impact on search - Google Chrome does not use the property and still searches in localized version. Another option is to put the property to Preferences file (for instance on Linux, the full path to the file is ~/.config/google-chrome/Default/Preferences) - which works perfectly when I start Google Chrome and do some search - but just after that, the property (actually the whole Preferences file) is overriden, so "the most important" trailing part ?hl=en& of the property value is removed - and without it, the non-localized search does not work anymore. Why does Google Chrome ignore last_known_google_url property in Local State file?

    Read the article

  • Google suddenly only indexes https and not http

    - by spender
    So all of a sudden, searches for our site "radiotuna" give out the result as an HTTPS link. https://www.google.com/?q=radiotuna#hl=en&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=radiotuna&oq=radiotuna&gs_l=hp.12...0.0.0.3499.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.LnOvBvgDOBk&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&fp=177c7ff705652ec3&biw=1366&bih=602 We only use https for the download of two specific files (these urls are resources used for autoupdate functionality of an app we distribute). All other parts of the site should be served over http. We wouldn't like to see any other traffic over https, nor any of our site links to appear in search engines as https. I'd like to address this issue. It seems that the following solutions are available: hand out an https specific robots.txt as such: User-agent: * Disallow: / and/or at app-level, 301 permanent redirect all requests (except the two above) to HTTP if they come in as HTTPS. My concern with the robots method is that, say (for some reason) google decided not to index http pages, disallowing https pages might mean that google has nothing left to index with disastrous consequences for our ranking. This means I'm inclined to go with a 301 redirect. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Want Google to index redirect urls

    - by Dave Goten
    I'm having issues with users who think that Google Search is the address bar. Some of the sites that link to my site use user friendly addresses with 301 redirects to pages that have less friendly URLs. So, for example if I enter www.foo.com/bar it goes to www.bar.com/page.php?some-parameters-and-utm-codes-etc usually this is done by a 301 redirect in order to keep the SEO from foo.com on bar.com and so on, which I believe is standard practice. However, lately there have been more and more people searching www.foo.com/bar instead of going to www.foo.com/bar directly and because the page /bar is nothing more than a redirect it has no SEO that I know of. Things I've thought of but haven't been able to test, because Google takes forever to update :) (and I'm lazy like that), include using Google sitemaps and having them enter their redirects as entries there. (I could see this working if they were the top search entry all the time, and it might appear as a sitelink, but I don't know if that'll make the url itself show up in searches) Using Canonical tags on my pages to the redirects they set up. Which is a nightmare in itself because of the nature of my pages. One week the www.foo.com/bar might go to www.bar.com/pageA.php the next it might goto www.bar.com/pageB.php and having to remember to take the canonical tag off of pageA, so that it doesn't get confused with pageB would be a pain. Using 302 redirects -.- So I guess the question here is, does anyone have any experience or knowledge about this? What should I do to make www.foo.com/bar show up when someone 'searches' for this redirect url?

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net Web API in Visual Studio 2010

    - by sreejukg
    Recently for one of my project, it was necessary to create couple of services. In the past I was using WCF, since my Services are going to be utilized through HTTP, I was thinking of ASP.Net web API. So I decided to create a Web API project. Now the real issue is that ASP.Net Web API launched after Visual Studio 2010 and I had to use ASP.Net web API in VS 2010 itself. By default there is no template available for Web API in Visual Studio 2010. Microsoft has made available an update that installs ASP.Net MVC 4 with web API in Visual Studio 2010. You can find the update from the below url. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=30683 Though the update denotes ASP.Net MVC 4, this also includes ASP.Net Web API. Download the installation media and start the installer. As usual for any update, you need to agree on terms and conditions. The installation starts straight away, once you clicked the Install button. If everything goes ok, you will see the success message. Now open Visual Studio 2010, you can see ASP.Net MVC 4 Project template is available for you. Now you can create ASP.Net Web API project using Visual Studio 2010. When you create a new ASP.Net MVC 4 project, you can choose the Web API template. Further reading http://www.asp.net/web-api/overview/getting-started-with-aspnet-web-api/tutorial-your-first-web-api http://www.asp.net/mvc/mvc4

    Read the article

  • Plus signs appearing in Google searches

    - by emddudley
    Ever since Google implemented their new look at the beginning of May, I have been having trouble with their search engine changing all of the spaces in my query to plus signs. This behavior occurs when I use the search box in both Firefox and Internet Explorer. For example, if I search for google search plus signs I am taken to the following URL, where google+search+plus+signs is in the search box. http://www.google.com/search?q=google+search+plus+signs&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a However if I perform the search from google.com, I get taken to a different URL with google search plus signs as I'd expect: http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=google+search+plus+signs&aq=f&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=&fp=d2a3ca21987adb1 Do I need to update my browsers or something?

    Read the article

  • How to Search Just the Site You’re Viewing Using Google Search

    - by The Geek
    Have you ever wanted to search the site you’re viewing, but the built-in search box is either hard to find, or doesn’t work very well? Here’s how to add a special keyword bookmark that searches the site you’re viewing using Google’s site: search operator. This technique should work in either Google Chrome or Firefox—in Firefox you’ll want to create a regular bookmark and add the script into the keyword field, and for Google Chrome just follow the steps we’ve provided below Latest Features How-To Geek ETC How to Use the Avira Rescue CD to Clean Your Infected PC The Complete List of iPad Tips, Tricks, and Tutorials Is Your Desktop Printer More Expensive Than Printing Services? 20 OS X Keyboard Shortcuts You Might Not Know HTG Explains: Which Linux File System Should You Choose? HTG Explains: Why Does Photo Paper Improve Print Quality? Simon’s Cat Explores the Christmas Tree! [Video] The Outdoor Lights Scene from National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation [Video] The Famous Home Alone Pizza Delivery Scene [Classic Video] Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader Theme for Windows 7 Cardinal and Rabbit Sharing a Tree on a Cold Winter Morning Wallpaper An Alternate Star Wars Christmas Special [Video]

    Read the article

  • Google Font API & Google Font Directory

    - by joelvarty
    There is a CSS element out there that looks like this: @font-face {   font-family: '';   src: url('…'); } I’ve only used this tag in a bunch of old apps and sites that were built exclusively for IE back in the day.  Well, it’s part of CSS 3 and Google is going to make it easy to find and share fonts. http://googlecode.blogspot.com/2010/05/introducing-google-font-api-google-font.html   more later - joel

    Read the article

  • When is a Google Maps API key required?

    - by Thomas
    Recently Google changed it's policy on the use API keys. You're now supposed to no longer need an API key to place Google Maps on your website. And this worked perfectly. But now I have this map (without API key) running on my localhost, which works fine. But as soon as I place it online, I get a popup saying that I need another API key. And on another page on that website, Google Maps does work. Could it maybe have something to do with that the map that doesn't work have a lot (30+) of markers on it? Actually using an API key wouldn't be a very nice solution to me, as this is part of a Wordpress plugin used on many websites.

    Read the article

  • Passing multiple POST parameters to Web API Controller Methods

    - by Rick Strahl
    ASP.NET Web API introduces a new API for creating REST APIs and making AJAX callbacks to the server. This new API provides a host of new great functionality that unifies many of the features of many of the various AJAX/REST APIs that Microsoft created before it - ASP.NET AJAX, WCF REST specifically - and combines them into a whole more consistent API. Web API addresses many of the concerns that developers had with these older APIs, namely that it was very difficult to build consistent REST style resource APIs easily. While Web API provides many new features and makes many scenarios much easier, a lot of the focus has been on making it easier to build REST compliant APIs that are focused on resource based solutions and HTTP verbs. But  RPC style calls that are common with AJAX callbacks in Web applications, have gotten a lot less focus and there are a few scenarios that are not that obvious, especially if you're expecting Web API to provide functionality similar to ASP.NET AJAX style AJAX callbacks. RPC vs. 'Proper' REST RPC style HTTP calls mimic calling a method with parameters and returning a result. Rather than mapping explicit server side resources or 'nouns' RPC calls tend simply map a server side operation, passing in parameters and receiving a typed result where parameters and result values are marshaled over HTTP. Typically RPC calls - like SOAP calls - tend to always be POST operations rather than following HTTP conventions and using the GET/POST/PUT/DELETE etc. verbs to implicitly determine what operation needs to be fired. RPC might not be considered 'cool' anymore, but for typical private AJAX backend operations of a Web site I'd wager that a large percentage of use cases of Web API will fall towards RPC style calls rather than 'proper' REST style APIs. Web applications that have needs for things like live validation against data, filling data based on user inputs, handling small UI updates often don't lend themselves very well to limited HTTP verb usage. It might not be what the cool kids do, but I don't see RPC calls getting replaced by proper REST APIs any time soon.  Proper REST has its place - for 'real' API scenarios that manage and publish/share resources, but for more transactional operations RPC seems a better choice and much easier to implement than trying to shoehorn a boatload of endpoint methods into a few HTTP verbs. In any case Web API does a good job of providing both RPC abstraction as well as the HTTP Verb/REST abstraction. RPC works well out of the box, but there are some differences especially if you're coming from ASP.NET AJAX service or WCF Rest when it comes to multiple parameters. Action Routing for RPC Style Calls If you've looked at Web API demos you've probably seen a bunch of examples of how to create HTTP Verb based routing endpoints. Verb based routing essentially maps a controller and then uses HTTP verbs to map the methods that are called in response to HTTP requests. This works great for resource APIs but doesn't work so well when you have many operational methods in a single controller. HTTP Verb routing is limited to the few HTTP verbs available (plus separate method signatures) and - worse than that - you can't easily extend the controller with custom routes or action routing beyond that. Thankfully Web API also supports Action based routing which allows you create RPC style endpoints fairly easily:RouteTable.Routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "AlbumRpcApiAction", routeTemplate: "albums/{action}/{title}", defaults: new { title = RouteParameter.Optional, controller = "AlbumApi", action = "GetAblums" } ); This uses traditional MVC style {action} method routing which is different from the HTTP verb based routing you might have read a bunch about in conjunction with Web API. Action based routing like above lets you specify an end point method in a Web API controller either via the {action} parameter in the route string or via a default value for custom routes. Using routing you can pass multiple parameters either on the route itself or pass parameters on the query string, via ModelBinding or content value binding. For most common scenarios this actually works very well. As long as you are passing either a single complex type via a POST operation, or multiple simple types via query string or POST buffer, there's no issue. But if you need to pass multiple parameters as was easily done with WCF REST or ASP.NET AJAX things are not so obvious. Web API has no issue allowing for single parameter like this:[HttpPost] public string PostAlbum(Album album) { return String.Format("{0} {1:d}", album.AlbumName, album.Entered); } There are actually two ways to call this endpoint: albums/PostAlbum Using the Model Binder with plain POST values In this mechanism you're sending plain urlencoded POST values to the server which the ModelBinder then maps the parameter. Each property value is matched to each matching POST value. This works similar to the way that MVC's  ModelBinder works. Here's how you can POST using the ModelBinder and jQuery:$.ajax( { url: "albums/PostAlbum", type: "POST", data: { AlbumName: "Dirty Deeds", Entered: "5/1/2012" }, success: function (result) { alert(result); }, error: function (xhr, status, p3, p4) { var err = "Error " + " " + status + " " + p3; if (xhr.responseText && xhr.responseText[0] == "{") err = JSON.parse(xhr.responseText).message; alert(err); } }); Here's what the POST data looks like for this request: The model binder and it's straight form based POST mechanism is great for posting data directly from HTML pages to model objects. It avoids having to do manual conversions for many operations and is a great boon for AJAX callback requests. Using Web API JSON Formatter The other option is to post data using a JSON string. The process for this is similar except that you create a JavaScript object and serialize it to JSON first.album = { AlbumName: "PowerAge", Entered: new Date(1977,0,1) } $.ajax( { url: "albums/PostAlbum", type: "POST", contentType: "application/json", data: JSON.stringify(album), success: function (result) { alert(result); } }); Here the data is sent using a JSON object rather than form data and the data is JSON encoded over the wire. The trace reveals that the data is sent using plain JSON (Source above), which is a little more efficient since there's no UrlEncoding that occurs. BTW, notice that WebAPI automatically deals with the date. I provided the date as a plain string, rather than a JavaScript date value and the Formatter and ModelBinder both automatically map the date propertly to the Entered DateTime property of the Album object. Passing multiple Parameters to a Web API Controller Single parameters work fine in either of these RPC scenarios and that's to be expected. ModelBinding always works against a single object because it maps a model. But what happens when you want to pass multiple parameters? Consider an API Controller method that has a signature like the following:[HttpPost] public string PostAlbum(Album album, string userToken) Here I'm asking to pass two objects to an RPC method. Is that possible? This used to be fairly straight forward either with WCF REST and ASP.NET AJAX ASMX services, but as far as I can tell this is not directly possible using a POST operation with WebAPI. There a few workarounds that you can use to make this work: Use both POST *and* QueryString Parameters in Conjunction If you have both complex and simple parameters, you can pass simple parameters on the query string. The above would actually work with: /album/PostAlbum?userToken=sekkritt but that's not always possible. In this example it might not be a good idea to pass a user token on the query string though. It also won't work if you need to pass multiple complex objects, since query string values do not support complex type mapping. They only work with simple types. Use a single Object that wraps the two Parameters If you go by service based architecture guidelines every service method should always pass and return a single value only. The input should wrap potentially multiple input parameters and the output should convey status as well as provide the result value. You typically have a xxxRequest and a xxxResponse class that wraps the inputs and outputs. Here's what this method might look like:public PostAlbumResponse PostAlbum(PostAlbumRequest request) { var album = request.Album; var userToken = request.UserToken; return new PostAlbumResponse() { IsSuccess = true, Result = String.Format("{0} {1:d} {2}", album.AlbumName, album.Entered,userToken) }; } with these support types:public class PostAlbumRequest { public Album Album { get; set; } public User User { get; set; } public string UserToken { get; set; } } public class PostAlbumResponse { public string Result { get; set; } public bool IsSuccess { get; set; } public string ErrorMessage { get; set; } }   To call this method you now have to assemble these objects on the client and send it up as JSON:var album = { AlbumName: "PowerAge", Entered: "1/1/1977" } var user = { Name: "Rick" } var userToken = "sekkritt"; $.ajax( { url: "samples/PostAlbum", type: "POST", contentType: "application/json", data: JSON.stringify({ Album: album, User: user, UserToken: userToken }), success: function (result) { alert(result.Result); } }); I assemble the individual types first and then combine them in the data: property of the $.ajax() call into the actual object passed to the server, that mimics the structure of PostAlbumRequest server class that has Album, User and UserToken properties. This works well enough but it gets tedious if you have to create Request and Response types for each method signature. If you have common parameters that are always passed (like you always pass an album or usertoken) you might be able to abstract this to use a single object that gets reused for all methods, but this gets confusing too: Overload a single 'parameter' too much and it becomes a nightmare to decipher what your method actual can use. Use JObject to parse multiple Property Values out of an Object If you recall, ASP.NET AJAX and WCF REST used a 'wrapper' object to make default AJAX calls. Rather than directly calling a service you always passed an object which contained properties for each parameter: { parm1: Value, parm2: Value2 } WCF REST/ASP.NET AJAX would then parse this top level property values and map them to the parameters of the endpoint method. This automatic type wrapping functionality is no longer available directly in Web API, but since Web API now uses JSON.NET for it's JSON serializer you can actually simulate that behavior with a little extra code. You can use the JObject class to receive a dynamic JSON result and then using the dynamic cast of JObject to walk through the child objects and even parse them into strongly typed objects. Here's how to do this on the API Controller end:[HttpPost] public string PostAlbum(JObject jsonData) { dynamic json = jsonData; JObject jalbum = json.Album; JObject juser = json.User; string token = json.UserToken; var album = jalbum.ToObject<Album>(); var user = juser.ToObject<User>(); return String.Format("{0} {1} {2}", album.AlbumName, user.Name, token); } This is clearly not as nice as having the parameters passed directly, but it works to allow you to pass multiple parameters and access them using Web API. JObject is JSON.NET's generic object container which sports a nice dynamic interface that allows you to walk through the object's properties using standard 'dot' object syntax. All you have to do is cast the object to dynamic to get access to the property interface of the JSON type. Additionally JObject also allows you to parse JObject instances into strongly typed objects, which enables us here to retrieve the two objects passed as parameters from this jquery code:var album = { AlbumName: "PowerAge", Entered: "1/1/1977" } var user = { Name: "Rick" } var userToken = "sekkritt"; $.ajax( { url: "samples/PostAlbum", type: "POST", contentType: "application/json", data: JSON.stringify({ Album: album, User: user, UserToken: userToken }), success: function (result) { alert(result); } }); Summary ASP.NET Web API brings many new features and many advantages over the older Microsoft AJAX and REST APIs, but realize that some things like passing multiple strongly typed object parameters will work a bit differently. It's not insurmountable, but just knowing what options are available to simulate this behavior is good to know. Now let me say here that it's probably not a good practice to pass a bunch of parameters to an API call. Ideally APIs should be closely factored to accept single parameters or a single content parameter at least along with some identifier parameters that can be passed on the querystring. But saying that doesn't mean that occasionally you don't run into a situation where you have the need to pass several objects to the server and all three of the options I mentioned might have merit in different situations. For now I'm sure the question of how to pass multiple parameters will come up quite a bit from people migrating WCF REST or ASP.NET AJAX code to Web API. At least there are options available to make it work.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Web Api   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Linking competitor with the same keyword i am targeting : Good or Bad for Seo?

    - by Badal Surana
    i am linking one of my competitors from my site for the same keyword which is i am targeting for my site.(My competitor is paying me for that) For Example: Me and my competitor both are targeting on keyword "foo" and my competitor paying me for linking his site from my site with keyword "foo" What i want to know is if i do that will my site's position go down in Google search results? or it will make no difference??

    Read the article

  • Best way to prevent Google from indexing a directory [duplicate]

    - by Gkhan14
    This question already has an answer here: Stopping Google index some web pages I have 5 answers I've researched many methods on how to prevent Google/other search engines from crawling a specific directory. The two most popular ones I've seen are: Adding it into the robots.txt file: Disallow: /directory/ Adding a meta tag: <meta name="robots" content="noindex, nofollow"> Which method would work the best? I want this directory to remain "invisible" from search engines so it does not affect any of my site's ranking. In other words, I want this directory to be neutral/invisible and "just there." I don't want it to affect any ranking. Which method would be the best to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Wrong content for URL cache on Google

    - by user32592
    I have this website natural-track.com and when I do a cache check I get a completely different website,This is Google's cache of http://www.backpackers-planet.com/modules.php?name=Web_Links&l_op=visit&lid=3379 , unrelated to my site. I have checked with the host, they say all is well on their side. How can we fix it? The site also went off from Google Search. We are about to rebuild this site to a better professional platform but first we would like to have an idea of what happened and how to fix it.

    Read the article

  • Interview question: How would you implement Google Search?

    - by ripper234
    Supposed you were asked in an interview "How would you implement Google Search?" How would you answer such a question? There might be resources out there that explain how some pieces in Google are implemented (BigTable, MapReduce, PageRank, ...), but that doesn't exactly fit in an interview. What overall architecture would you use, and how would you explain this in a 15-30 minute time span? I would start with explaining how to build a search engine that handles ~ 100k documents, then expand this via sharding to around 50M docs, then perhaps another architectural/technical leap. This is the 20,000 feet view. What I'd like is the details - how you would actually answer that in an interview. Which data structures would you use. What services/machines is your architecture composed of. What would a typical query latency be? What about failover / split brain issues? Etc...

    Read the article

  • Google nofollow, Disavow and Link Removal Requests

    - by PsychoDad
    I am the owner of http://www.YouReview.net and I am constantly getting requests from people asking me to remove links to their sites or they will Disavow the links and they threaten me with Google penalties. All of this is a bit frustrating because first I use nofollow on any link outside the YouReview.net domain. Second, I've never heard of Google penalizing a site for linking to other websites. My question is twofold: Do disavowed links penalize the site that was disavowed? and Does the "nofollow" attribute on tags absolutely guarantee that the link is not followed and not counted for search engine ranking? Why don't more people know about nofollow?

    Read the article

  • problem showing my website correctly in search engines

    - by dinbrca
    Hello guys, I have a website which i have indexed on google for example (like 15 days ago). some of my pages pass arguments like: http://www.bla.com/products.php?pro=bla&page=view suddently i saw that passing arguments like this isn't good for SEO purposes and started using htaccess rewrite. and changed the arguments to like this: http://www.bla.com/products/bla/*view*/ now my site on google still shows as i showed at link number 1 what should i do? i thought i should wait for the search engine to crawl my site again but nothing happened. thanks in advanced, Din

    Read the article

  • Google search results page titles "hijacked" by porn

    - by rfoote
    Sorry, that title probably doesn't make much sense. Over the past couple of weeks, we've noticed that the search results from Google for some of our drupal-powered sites are having their page titles hijacked somehow. An example would be: free streaming porn - [Actual page title] There are other variations of the porn prefix, that's one of the more tame ones. I looked in the databases for each of these sites and the titles haven't actually been changed or anything along those lines. When you click on the result to visit the page everything looks normal (sans porn stuff). Would anyone be able to point me in the right direction as to what the cause of this is? Searching Google for the potential problem isn't being much help, yet. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Change from static HTML file to meta tag for Google Webmaster verification

    - by Wilfred Springer
    I started verifying the server by putting a couple of static HTMLs in place. Then I noticed that Google wants you to keep these files in place. I didn't want to keep the static HTMLs in, so I want to switch to an alternative verification mechanism, and include the meta tags on the home page. Unfortunately, once your site is verified, you never seem to be able to change to an alternative way of verification. I tried removing the HTML pages. No luck whatsoever. Google still considers the site to be 'verified'. Does anybody know how to undo this? All I want to do is switch to the meta tag based method of site ownership verification.

    Read the article

  • Writing an optimised and efficient search engine with mySQL and ColdFusion

    - by Mel
    I have a search page with the following scenarios listed below. I was told there was a better way to do it, but not how, and that I am using too many if statements, and that it's prone to causing an error through url manipulation: Search.cfm will processes a search made from a search bar present on all pages, with one search input (titleName). If search.cfm is accessed manually (through URL not through using the simple search bar on all pages) it displays an advanced search form with three inputs (titleName, genreID, platformID) or it evaluates searchResponse variable and decides what to do. If simple search query is blank, has no results, or less than 3 characters it displays an error If advanced search query is blank, has no results, or less than 3 characters it displays an error If any successful search returns results, they come back normally. The top-of-page logic is as follows: <!---SET DEFAULT VARIABLE---> <cfparam name="variables.searchResponse" default=""> <!---CHECK TO SEE IF SIMPLE SEARCH A FORM WAS SUBMITTED AND EXECUTE SEARCH IF IT WAS---> <cfif IsDefined("Form.simpleSearch") AND Len(Trim(Form.titleName)) LTE 2> <cfset variables.searchResponse = "invalidString"> <cfelseif IsDefined("Form.simpleSearch") AND Len(Trim(Form.titleName)) GTE 3> <!---EXECUTE METHOD AND GET DATA---> <cfinvoke component="myComponent" method="simpleSearch" searchString="#Form.titleName#" returnvariable="simpleSearchResult"> <cfset variables.searchResponse = "simpleSearchResult"> </cfif> <!---CHECK IF ANY RECORDS WERE FOUND---> <cfif IsDefined("variables.simpleSearchResult") AND simpleSearchResult.RecordCount IS 0> <cfset variables.searchResponse = "noResult"> </cfif> <!---CHECK IF ADVANCED SEARCH FORM WAS SUBMITTED---> <cfif IsDefined("Form.AdvancedSearch") AND Len(Trim(Form.titleName)) LTE 2> <cfset variables.searchResponse = "invalidString"> <cfelseif IsDefined("Form.advancedSearch") AND Len(Trim(Form.titleName)) GTE 2> <!---EXECUTE METHOD AND GET DATA---> <cfinvoke component="myComponent" method="advancedSearch" returnvariable="advancedSearchResult" titleName="#Form.titleName#" genreID="#Form.genreID#" platformID="#Form.platformID#"> <cfset variables.searchResponse = "advancedSearchResult"> </cfif> <!---CHECK IF ANY RECORDS WERE FOUND---> <cfif IsDefined("variables.advancedSearchResult") AND advancedSearchResult.RecordCount IS 0> <cfset variables.searchResponse = "noResult"> </cfif> I'm using the searchResponse variable to decide what the the page displays, based on the following scenarios: <!---ALWAYS DISPLAY SIMPLE SEARCH BAR AS IT'S PART OF THE HEADER---> <form name="simpleSearch" action="search.cfm" method="post"> <input type="hidden" name="simpleSearch" /> <input type="text" name="titleName" /> <input type="button" value="Search" onclick="form.submit()" /> </form> <!---IF NO SEARCH WAS SUBMITTED DISPLAY DEFAULT FORM---> <cfif searchResponse IS ""> <h1>Advanced Search</h1> <!---DISPLAY FORM---> <form name="advancedSearch" action="search.cfm" method="post"> <input type="hidden" name="advancedSearch" /> <input type="text" name="titleName" /> <input type="text" name="genreID" /> <input type="text" name="platformID" /> <input type="button" value="Search" onclick="form.submit()" /> </form> </cfif> <!---IF SEARCH IS BLANK OR LESS THAN 3 CHARACTERS DISPLAY ERROR MESSAGE---> <cfif searchResponse IS "invalidString"> <cfoutput> <h1>INVALID SEARCH</h1> </cfoutput> </cfif> <!---IF SEARCH WAS MADE BUT NO RESULTS WERE FOUND---> <cfif searchResponse IS "noResult"> <cfoutput> <h1>NO RESULT FOUND</h1> </cfoutput> </cfif> <!---IF SIMPLE SEARCH WAS MADE A RESULT WAS FOUND---> <cfif searchResponse IS "simpleSearchResult"> <cfoutput> <h1>Search Results</h1> </cfoutput> <cfoutput query="simpleSearchResult"> <!---DISPLAY QUERY DATA---> </cfoutput> </cfif> <!---IF ADVANCED SEARCH WAS MADE A RESULT WAS FOUND---> <cfif searchResponse IS "advancedSearchResult"> <cfoutput> <h1>Search Results</h1> <p>Your search for "#Form.titleName#" returned #advancedSearchResult.RecordCount# result(s).</p> </cfoutput> <cfoutput query="advancedSearchResult"> <!---DISPLAY QUERY DATA---> </cfoutput> </cfif> Is my logic a) not efficient because my if statements/is there a better way to do this? And b) Can you see any scenarios where my code can break? I've tested it but I have not been able to find any issues with it. And I have no way of measuring performance. Any thoughts and ideas would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks

    Read the article

  • Interacting with google docs after logging into my google market apps - how

    - by Ali
    Hi guys I have a google apps account set up and even set up a simple hello world application from the available samples on the tutorial however I need to set it so I am able to interact with the google docs account associated with the account which has added my application. To interact with google docs I am aware that a token is requested from google upon authentication and verification of the account however that is in a situation where you code specifically for interacting with google docs - I'm talking about having access to the google docs of the account which has added my application so my application can be used to upload documents to the google docs and make references to them - basically my application is a resource management application and it needs to be able to store references to google docs.

    Read the article

  • Google Script / Spreadsheet -- Shared permissions with Installed Trigger onEdit

    - by user1761852
    Using an installed trigger inside spreadsheet to call onUpdateBilling(). Purpose of this script is on edit, based on content of column "billed" (i.e. "d") will highlight the entire column the predetermined color. Page running script is shared with collaborators and they have been given edit access. My expectation at this point is the script should be run with owner permissions. My shared users are unable to run the script with the given error "You don't have permission for this action." Reached my limited knowledge and googlefu for this workaround. Any help to allow operation to my collaborators is appreciated. Script: function onUpdateBilling(e) { var statusCol = 16; // replace with the column index of Status column A=1,B=2,etc var sheetName = "Temple Log"; // replace with actual name of sheet containing Status var cell = SpreadsheetApp.getActiveSheet().getActiveCell(); var sheet = cell.getSheet(); if(cell.getColumnIndex() != statusCol || sheet.getName() != sheetName) return; var row = cell.getRowIndex(); var status = cell.getValue(); // change colors to meet your needs var color; if (status == "D" || status == "d") { color = "red";} else if (status >= 1) { color = "yellow";} else if (status == "X" || status == "x") { color = "black";} else if (status == "") { color = "white";} else { color = "white"; } sheet.getRange(row + ":" + row ).setBackgroundColor(color); }

    Read the article

  • Should one always know what an API is doing just by looking at the code?

    - by markmnl
    Recently I have been developing my own API and with that invested interest in API design I have been keenly interested how I can improve my API design. One aspect that has come up a couple times is (not by users of my API but in my observing discussion about the topic): one should know just by looking at the code calling the API what it is doing. For example see this discussion on GitHub for the discourse repo, it goes something like: foo.update_pinned(true, true); Just by looking at the code (without knowing the parameter names, documentation etc.) one cannot guess what it is going to do - what does the 2nd argument mean? The suggested improvement is to have something like: foo.pin() foo.unpin() foo.pin_globally() And that clears things up (the 2nd arg was whether to pin foo globally, I am guessing), and I agree in this case the later would certainly be an improvement. However I believe there can be instances where methods to set different but logically related state would be better exposed as one method call rather than separate ones, even though you would not know what it is doing just by looking at the code. (So you would have to resort to looking at the parameter names and documentation to find out - which personally I would always do no matter what if I am unfamiliar with an API). For example I expose one method SetVisibility(bool, string, bool) on a FalconPeer and I acknowledge just looking at the line: falconPeer.SetVisibility(true, "aerw3", true); You would have no idea what it is doing. It is setting 3 different values that control the "visibility" of the falconPeer in the logical sense: accept join requests, only with password and reply to discovery requests. Splitting this out into 3 method calls could lead to a user of the API to set one aspect of "visibility" forgetting to set others that I force them to think about by only exposing the one method to set all aspects of "visibility". Furthermore when the user wants to change one aspect they almost always will want to change another aspect and can now do so in one call.

    Read the article

  • What is the evidence that an API has exceeded its orthogonality in the context of types?

    - by hawkeye
    Wikipedia defines software orthogonality as: orthogonality in a programming language means that a relatively small set of primitive constructs can be combined in a relatively small number of ways to build the control and data structures of the language. The term is most-frequently used regarding assembly instruction sets, as orthogonal instruction set. Jason Coffin has defined software orthogonality as Highly cohesive components that are loosely coupled to each other produce an orthogonal system. C.Ross has defined software orthogonality as: the property that means "Changing A does not change B". An example of an orthogonal system would be a radio, where changing the station does not change the volume and vice-versa. Now there is a hypothesis published in the the ACM Queue by Tim Bray - that some have called the Bánffy Bray Type System Criteria - which he summarises as: Static typings attractiveness is a direct function (and dynamic typings an inverse function) of API surface size. Dynamic typings attractiveness is a direct function (and static typings an inverse function) of unit testing workability. Now Stuart Halloway has reformulated Banfy Bray as: the more your APIs exceed orthogonality, the better you will like static typing My question is: What is the evidence that an API has exceeded its orthogonality in the context of types? Clarification Tim Bray introduces the idea of orthogonality and APIs. Where you have one API and it is mainly dealing with Strings (ie a web server serving requests and responses), then a uni-typed language (python, ruby) is 'aligned' to that API - because the the type system of these languages isn't sophisticated, but it doesn't matter since you're dealing with Strings anyway. He then moves on to Android programming, which has a whole bunch of sensor APIs, which are all 'different' to the web server API that he was working on previously. Because you're not just dealing with Strings, but with different types, the API is non-orthogonal. Tim's point is that there is a empirical relationship between your 'liking' of types and the API you're programming against. (ie a subjective point is actually objective depending on your context).

    Read the article

  • Google Chrome sync: limit for bookmarks & extensions?

    - by Lyubomyr Shaydariv
    Actually, Chrome is my favorite web-browser, and one of its most powerful features is synchronizing the actual data into a Google account. For the last years I gained a lot of bookmarks and from time to time browse the extensions gallery to find new valuable ones. Really, synchronizing between my work and home PC's freed me from manual sync. And for the recent months I experience strange glitches. I guess it may be caused by a lot of stored bookmarks (potentially about 3K [in estimate], but please don't ask why :)) and extensions (about 130 installed but only 10-15 daily used). I can mention the following strange things: Recently added bookmarks sometimes are not synchronized (e.g. I put a bookmark at work, but it's not guaranteed I can see it that evening), despite about:sync indicates a good sync process. Sometimes recently modified bookmarks appear in either (let's call) last at home or last at work bookmark folders. Sometimes bookmarks are not synced at all. (Moreover, Chromium versions may even crash) Extensions are not synced now at all. Perhaps, there's another reason, but Google Mail Checker and Google Reader Notifier do not show indicators of incoming e-mails and news. ... I'm not sure but it looks like I might exceed Chrome internal sync limits... Is it right? Are there any workarounds, or should I make a massive bookmarks/extensions cleanup (I really don't want it :()? I mostly use Google Chrome Canary builds, and the my current one is 12.0.732.0. Thanks in advance. Update #1 (2001-04-19): I removed about 50 extensions that I'm not interested in (or that I consider as trash), and gained pretty some results: The extensions count is below 100 (exactly 97); The chrome://extensions page does not get slow (or even frozen) any more on enabling/disabling/uninstalling extensions; The extensions are seem to be synchronized now again.

    Read the article

  • Can I use a Google Appliance/Mini to crawl and index sites I don't own?

    - by SkippyFire
    Maybe this is a stupid question, but... I am working with this company and they said they needed to get "permission" to crawl other people's sites. They have a Google Search Appliance And some Google Minis and want to point them at other sites to aggregate content. The end result will be something like a targeted search engine. (All the indexed sites relate to a specific topic) The only thing they will be doing is: Indexing Content from the other sites/domains Providing search functionality on their own site that searches the indexed content (like Google, displaying summaries and not the full content) The search results will provide links back to the original content Their intent is not malicious in nature, and is to provide a single site/resource for people to reference on their given topic. Is there anything illegal or fishy about this process?

    Read the article

  • The Sitemap Paradox

    - by Jeff Atwood
    We use a sitemap on Stack Overflow, but I have mixed feelings about it. Web crawlers usually discover pages from links within the site and from other sites. Sitemaps supplement this data to allow crawlers that support Sitemaps to pick up all URLs in the Sitemap and learn about those URLs using the associated metadata. Using the Sitemap protocol does not guarantee that web pages are included in search engines, but provides hints for web crawlers to do a better job of crawling your site. Based on our two years' experience with sitemaps, there's something fundamentally paradoxical about the sitemap: Sitemaps are intended for sites that are hard to crawl properly. If Google can't successfully crawl your site to find a link, but is able to find it in the sitemap it gives the sitemap link no weight and will not index it! That's the sitemap paradox -- if your site isn't being properly crawled (for whatever reason), using a sitemap will not help you! Google goes out of their way to make no sitemap guarantees: "We cannot make any predictions or guarantees about when or if your URLs will be crawled or added to our index" citation "We don't guarantee that we'll crawl or index all of your URLs. For example, we won't crawl or index image URLs contained in your Sitemap." citation "submitting a Sitemap doesn't guarantee that all pages of your site will be crawled or included in our search results" citation Given that links found in sitemaps are merely recommendations, whereas links found on your own website proper are considered canonical ... it seems the only logical thing to do is avoid having a sitemap and make damn sure that Google and any other search engine can properly spider your site using the plain old standard web pages everyone else sees. By the time you have done that, and are getting spidered nice and thoroughly so Google can see that your own site links to these pages, and would be willing to crawl the links -- uh, why do we need a sitemap, again? The sitemap can be actively harmful, because it distracts you from ensuring that search engine spiders are able to successfully crawl your whole site. "Oh, it doesn't matter if the crawler can see it, we'll just slap those links in the sitemap!" Reality is quite the opposite in our experience. That seems more than a little ironic considering sitemaps were intended for sites that have a very deep collection of links or complex UI that may be hard to spider. In our experience, the sitemap does not help, because if Google can't find the link on your site proper, it won't index it from the sitemap anyway. We've seen this proven time and time again with Stack Overflow questions. Am I wrong? Do sitemaps make sense, and we're somehow just using them incorrectly?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >