Search Results

Search found 1348 results on 54 pages for 'floating accuracy'.

Page 11/54 | < Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >

  • floating image wrapped by text in android

    - by nourdine
    hello I think the title says it all. I need to accomplish this result in android but it looks like there is no easy fix to my problem. Just to clarify a bit more: if I had to do it in html css I would write something like <img src="Image URL" style="float:left; margin-right: 5px;" /> got it? ;) thanks guyz

    Read the article

  • "text-overflow: ellipsis" not working well in firefox with floating element around

    - by Freedom
    see jsfiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/9v8faLeh/1/ I have two elements .text and .badge in a .container with a limit width: <div class="container"> <span class="badge">(*)</span> <span class="text">this is a long long long long text.</span> </div> the .badge element may not exist in a .container according to the data. if a .badge exist, I want the .badge element to float to right. and if the .text is too long, the text should ellipsis. .container { width: 150px; border: 1px solid; padding: 5px; white-space: nowrap; text-overflow: ellipsis; overflow: hidden; } .badge { float: right; margin-left: 5px; } if you open the jsfiddle link in Chrome or IE, it displays correctly as my expectation. but if open in Firefox, the .text and .badge are overlay if the text is so long. I don't want to use any JavaScript. how can I achieve the same result in FireFox?

    Read the article

  • Next Div Does not appear correctly after floating two divs to right and left

    - by user3703669
    I have floated two divs to left and right...But the next div after those two divs does not appear correctly... My code is follows #Div1{ position: relative; float: left; } #Div2{ position: relative; float: right; } And the display as follows <div id="Div1">This is aligned to left on the same x axis</div> <div id="Div2">This is aligned to right on the same x axis</div> <div style="color: red;">After the alignment this div does not align</div> The output is as follows http://i.stack.imgur.com/8A6hz.png But I expect something like this http://i.stack.imgur.com/wVGN6.png Anyway to accomplish this task ?? Please HELP!! Urgent help needed!!!

    Read the article

  • Please help me get my content div to get an auto height from absolutely positioned element

    - by Justin Hollender
    I need some help with a CSS layout. It is set up like this: +--------------------+ | | | header | |-| |--------------| | |nav| content | | | | | | | | | | | | | | footer | +--------------------+ So, the nav is supposed to be floating above all the main page content. That's why I have it set to be absolutely positioned. The issue is that the nav items are dynamic, without a set height. Right now, the nav expands past the content. How can I fix it so that the content will have an auto height based off the nav? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • floating point exception in C++ code !

    - by mekasperasky
    #include<stdio.h> #include<math.h> int main () { FILE *fp; fp=fopen("output","w"); float t,y=0,x=0,e=5,f=1,w=1; for (t=0;t<10;t=t+0.01) { if( y==inf && y== nan) break; fprintf(fp,"%lf\t%lf\n",y,x); y = y + ((e*(1 - x*x)*y) - x + f*cos(w*t))*t; x = x + y*t; } return (0); } why is the ouput giving infinite and NAN values?

    Read the article

  • python floating number

    - by zhack
    i am kind of confused why python add some additional decimal number in this case, please help to explain >>> mylist = ["list item 1", 2, 3.14] >>> print mylist ['list item 1', 2, 3.1400000000000001]

    Read the article

  • Floating toolbar on bottom, centered, 80% of current screen width

    - by Tom
    I'm trying to implement a Facebook like toolbar on the bottom of the screen for a website I'm currently working on. Currently, I have it 100% of the width of the screen but I'd like to have it look almost exactly like Facebook's toolbar, centered, bottom justified on top, around 80% of the current screen's width. Here is the current CSS for the toolbar I have that is 100% of the screen's width. Thanks in advance. CSS: <style type="text/css"> #toolbar { background:url('/_assets/img/toolbar.gif') repeat-x; height:25px; position:fixed; bottom:0px; width:100%; left:0px; border-left:1px solid #000000; border-right:1px solid #000000; z-index:100; font-size:0.8em; } </style>

    Read the article

  • CSS: Why is my floated <span> being displayed below an <a>nchor in IE6/7 but not IE8/FF

    - by gsquare567
    i'm getting this weird CSS bug in ie6/7 (but not in ie8 or firefox): for some reason, my nchor and , two inline elements, which are on the same line, are being displayed on different lines. the span is floating to the right, too! heres the HTML: <div class="sidebartextbg"><a href="journey.php" style="width:50%" title="Track past, present and future milestones during your employment">Journey</a> <span class="notificationNumber">2</span> <!-- JOURNEY COUNT: end --> </div> and here's the CSS: .sidebartextbg { background:url("../images/sidebartextbg.gif") repeat-x scroll 0 0 transparent; border-bottom:1px solid #A3A88B; font-size:14px; line-height:18px; margin:0 auto; padding:5px 9px; width:270px; } .notificationNumber { background:url("../images/oval_edges.gif") no-repeat scroll 0 0 transparent; color:#FFFFFF; float:right; padding:0 7px; position:relative; text-align:center; width:17px; } so: why would the floated span be displayed on the line under the nchor? thanks!

    Read the article

  • The sign of zero with float2

    - by JackOLantern
    Consider the following code performing operations on complex numbers with C/C++'s float: float real_part = log(3.f); float imag_part = 0.f; float real_part2 = (imag_part)*(imag_part)-(real_part*real_part); float imag_part2 = (imag_part)*(real_part)+(real_part*imag_part); The result will be real_part2= -1.20695 imag_part2= 0 angle= 3.14159 where angle is the phase of the complex number and, in this case, is pi. Now consider the following code: float real_part = log(3.f); float imag_part = 0.f; float real_part2 = (-imag_part)*(-imag_part)-(real_part)*(real_part); float imag_part2 = (-imag_part)*(real_part)+(real_part)*(-imag_part); The result will be real_part2= -1.20695 imag_part2= 0 angle= -3.14159 The imaginary part of the result is -0 which makes the phase of the result be -pi. Although still accomplishing with the principal argument of a complex number and with the signed property of floating point's 0, this changes is a problem when one is defining functions of complex numbers. For example, if one is defining sqrt of a complex number by the de Moivre formula, this will change the sign of the imaginary part of the result to a wrong value. How to deal with this effect?

    Read the article

  • set equal height on multiple divs

    - by Greenie
    I need to set equal height on a series of divs inside another div wrapper. The problem is that I dont want the same height on all of them. The page kind of have 3 columns and the floating divs can be 1, 2 or 3 columns wide. The divs float left, so the following example will give me three rows of divs in my wrapper. How can I set equal height on the divs that are in the same row? In my example I want nr 1 and 2 to have equal height and 3, 4 and 5 another equal height? I cant know beforehand how many divs there is or how wide or high they are. Edit: They can be for instance 300, 600 or 900 px wide and the page width is 900px <div id="wrapper"> <div class="one-wide">nr1</div> <div class="two-wide">nr2</div> <div class="one-wide">nr3</div> <div class="one-wide">nr4</div> <div class="one-wide">nr5</div> <div class="three-wide">nr6</div> </div> Im thinking I somehow need to figure out when the added width of the divs is at the full page width and set equal height on those. Then do the same on the next divs. But I cant wrap my head around it. Currently im just using this to set the height on the children of the wrapper: $.fn.equalHeights = function(px) { $(this).each(function(){ var currentTallest = 0; $(this).children().each(function(i){ if ($(this).height() > currentTallest) { currentTallest = $(this).height(); } }); // for ie6, set height since min-height isn't supported if ($.browser.msie && $.browser.version == 6.0) { $(this).children().css({'height': currentTallest}); } $(this).children('div').css({'min-height': currentTallest}); }); return this; };

    Read the article

  • How to manually (bitwise) perform (float)x? (homework)

    - by Silver
    Now, here is the function header of the function I'm supposed to implement: /* * float_from_int - Return bit-level equivalent of expression (float) x * Result is returned as unsigned int, but * it is to be interpreted as the bit-level representation of a * single-precision floating point values. * Legal ops: Any integer/unsigned operations incl. ||, &&. also if, while * Max ops: 30 * Rating: 4 */ unsigned float_from_int(int x) { ... } We aren't allowed to do float operations, or any kind of casting. Now I tried to implement the first algorithm given at this site: http://locklessinc.com/articles/i2f/ Here's my code: unsigned float_from_int(int x) { // grab sign bit int xIsNegative = 0; int absValOfX = x; if(x < 0){ xIsNegative = 1; absValOfX = -x; } // zero case if(x == 0){ return 0; } //int shiftsNeeded = 0; /*while(){ shiftsNeeded++; }*/ unsigned I2F_MAX_BITS = 15; unsigned I2F_MAX_INPUT = ((1 << I2F_MAX_BITS) - 1); unsigned I2F_SHIFT = (24 - I2F_MAX_BITS); unsigned result, i, exponent, fraction; if ((absValOfX & I2F_MAX_INPUT) == 0) result = 0; else { exponent = 126 + I2F_MAX_BITS; fraction = (absValOfX & I2F_MAX_INPUT) << I2F_SHIFT; i = 0; while(i < I2F_MAX_BITS) { if (fraction & 0x800000) break; else { fraction = fraction << 1; exponent = exponent - 1; } i++; } result = (xIsNegative << 31) | exponent << 23 | (fraction & 0x7fffff); } return result; } But it didn't work (see test error below): Test float_from_int(-2147483648[0x80000000]) failed... ...Gives 0[0x0]. Should be -822083584[0xcf000000] 4 4 0 float_times_four I don't know where to go from here. How should I go about parsing the float from this int?

    Read the article

  • Is android's motion event handling accurate??

    - by Peterdk
    Bug I have a weird bug in my piano app. Sometimes keys (and thus notes) hang. I did a lot of debugging and narrowed it down to what looks like androids inaccuracy of motion event handling: DEBUG/(2091): ACTION_DOWN A4 DEBUG/(2091): KeyDown: A4 DEBUG/(2091): ACTION_MOVE A4 => A4 DEBUG/(2091): ACTION_MOVE ignoring DEBUG/(2091): ACTION_MOVE A4 => A4 DEBUG/(2091): ACTION_MOVE ignoring DEBUG/(2091): ACTION_MOVE A4 => A4 DEBUG/(2091): ACTION_MOVE ignoring DEBUG/(2091): ACTION_UP B4 //HOW CAN THIS BE???? DEBUG/(2091): KeyUp: B4 DEBUG/(2091): Stream is null, can't stop DEBUG/(2091): Hanging Note: A4 X=240-287 EventX=292 Y=117-200 EventY=164 DEBUG/(2091): KeyUp Note: B4 X=288-335 EventX=292 Y=117-200 EventY=164 Clearly it can be seen here that out of nowhere I suddenly have an ACTION_UP for another note. Shouldn't I definitely get a ACTION_MOVE first? As shown in the end of the log, it's definitely not an error in region detection, since the ACTION_UP event is clearly in the B4 region. Logging Implementation details Every onTouchEvent() call is logged, so the log is accurate. The relevant pseudo-code for the ACTION_MOVE logging is: Key oldKey = Key.get(event.getHistoricalX(), event.getHistoricalY()); Key newKey = Key.get(event.getX(), event.getY()); Question Is this normal behaviour for Android (the jumping in coordinates)? Am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • erroneous Visual C float / double conversion?

    - by RED SOFT ADAIR
    In Visual C++ i wrote the following sample in a C++ program: float f1 = 42.48f; double d1 = 42.48; double d2 = f1; I compiled the program with Visual Studio 2005. In the debugger i see the following values: f1 42.480000 float d1 42.479999999999997 double d2 42.479999542236328 double d1 by my knowledege is OK, but d2 is wrong. The problem occurs as well with /fp=precise as with /fp=strict as with /fp=fast. Whats the problem here? Any hint how to avoid this Problem? This leads to serious numerical problems.

    Read the article

  • strange results with /fp:fast

    - by martinus
    We have some code that looks like this: inline int calc_something(double x) { if (x > 0.0) { // do something return 1; } else { // do something else return 0; } } Unfortunately, when using the flag /fp:fast, we get calc_something(0)==1 so we are clearly taking the wrong code path. This only happens when we use the method at multiple points in our code with different parameters, so I think there is some fishy optimization going on here from the compiler (Microsoft Visual Studio 2008, SP1). Also, the above problem goes away when we change the interface to inline int calc_something(const double& x) { But I have no idea why this fixes the strange behaviour. Can anyone explane this behaviour? If I cannot understand what's going on we will have to remove the /fp:fastswitch, but this would make our application quite a bit slower.

    Read the article

  • How to correctly and standardly compare floats?

    - by DIMEDROLL
    Every time I start a new project and when I need to compare some float or double variables I write the code like this one: if (fabs(prev.min[i] - cur->min[i]) < 0.000001 && fabs(prev.max[i] - cur->max[i]) < 0.000001) { continue; } Then I want to get rid of these magic variables 0.000001(and 0.00000000001 for double) and fabs, so I write an inline function and some defines: #define FLOAT_TOL 0.000001 So I wonder if there is any standard way of doing this? May be some standard header file? It would be also nice to have float and double limits(min and max values)

    Read the article

  • Round-twice error in .NET's Double.ToString method

    - by Jeppe Stig Nielsen
    Mathematically, consider for this question the rational number 8725724278030350 / 2**48 where ** in the denominator denotes exponentiation, i.e. the denominator is 2 to the 48th power. (The fraction is not in lowest terms, reducible by 2.) This number is exactly representable as a System.Double. Its decimal expansion is 31.0000000000000'49'73799150320701301097869873046875 (exact) where the apostrophes do not represent missing digits but merely mark the boudaries where rounding to 15 resp. 17 digits is to be performed. Note the following: If this number is rounded to 15 digits, the result will be 31 (followed by thirteen 0s) because the next digits (49...) begin with a 4 (meaning round down). But if the number is first rounded to 17 digits and then rounded to 15 digits, the result could be 31.0000000000001. This is because the first rounding rounds up by increasing the 49... digits to 50 (terminates) (next digits were 73...), and the second rounding might then round up again (when the midpoint-rounding rule says "round away from zero"). (There are many more numbers with the above characteristics, of course.) Now, it turns out that .NET's standard string representation of this number is "31.0000000000001". The question: Isn't this a bug? By standard string representation we mean the String produced by the parameterles Double.ToString() instance method which is of course identical to what is produced by ToString("G"). An interesting thing to note is that if you cast the above number to System.Decimal then you get a decimal that is 31 exactly! See this Stack Overflow question for a discussion of the surprising fact that casting a Double to Decimal involves first rounding to 15 digits. This means that casting to Decimal makes a correct round to 15 digits, whereas calling ToSting() makes an incorrect one. To sum up, we have a floating-point number that, when output to the user, is 31.0000000000001, but when converted to Decimal (where 29 digits are available), becomes 31 exactly. This is unfortunate. Here's some C# code for you to verify the problem: static void Main() { const double evil = 31.0000000000000497; string exactString = DoubleConverter.ToExactString(evil); // Jon Skeet, http://csharpindepth.com/Articles/General/FloatingPoint.aspx Console.WriteLine("Exact value (Jon Skeet): {0}", exactString); // writes 31.00000000000004973799150320701301097869873046875 Console.WriteLine("General format (G): {0}", evil); // writes 31.0000000000001 Console.WriteLine("Round-trip format (R): {0:R}", evil); // writes 31.00000000000005 Console.WriteLine(); Console.WriteLine("Binary repr.: {0}", String.Join(", ", BitConverter.GetBytes(evil).Select(b => "0x" + b.ToString("X2")))); Console.WriteLine(); decimal converted = (decimal)evil; Console.WriteLine("Decimal version: {0}", converted); // writes 31 decimal preciseDecimal = decimal.Parse(exactString, CultureInfo.InvariantCulture); Console.WriteLine("Better decimal: {0}", preciseDecimal); // writes 31.000000000000049737991503207 } The above code uses Skeet's ToExactString method. If you don't want to use his stuff (can be found through the URL), just delete the code lines above dependent on exactString. You can still see how the Double in question (evil) is rounded and cast.

    Read the article

  • Anything wrong with this function for comparing floats?

    - by Michael Borgwardt
    When my Floating-Point Guide was yesterday published on slashdot, I got a lot of flak for my suggested comparison function, which was indeed inadequate. So I finally did the sensible thing and wrote a test suite to see whether I could get them all to pass. Here is my result so far. And I wonder if this is really as good as one can get with a generic (i.e. not application specific) float comparison function, or whether I still missed some edge cases. import static org.junit.Assert.assertFalse; import static org.junit.Assert.assertTrue; import org.junit.Test; public class NearlyEqualsTest { public static boolean nearlyEqual(float a, float b) { final float epsilon = 0.000001f; final float absA = Math.abs(a); final float absB = Math.abs(b); final float diff = Math.abs(a-b); if (a*b==0) { // a or b or both are zero // relative error is not meaningful here return diff < Float.MIN_VALUE / epsilon; } else { // use relative error return diff / (absA+absB) < epsilon; } } /** Regular large numbers - generally not problematic */ @Test public void big() { assertTrue(nearlyEqual(1000000f, 1000001f)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(1000001f, 1000000f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(10000f, 10001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(10001f, 10000f)); } /** Negative large numbers */ @Test public void bigNeg() { assertTrue(nearlyEqual(-1000000f, -1000001f)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(-1000001f, -1000000f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-10000f, -10001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-10001f, -10000f)); } /** Numbers around 1 */ @Test public void mid() { assertTrue(nearlyEqual(1.0000001f, 1.0000002f)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(1.0000002f, 1.0000001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(1.0002f, 1.0001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(1.0001f, 1.0002f)); } /** Numbers around -1 */ @Test public void midNeg() { assertTrue(nearlyEqual(-1.000001f, -1.000002f)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(-1.000002f, -1.000001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-1.0001f, -1.0002f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-1.0002f, -1.0001f)); } /** Numbers between 1 and 0 */ @Test public void small() { assertTrue(nearlyEqual(0.000000001000001f, 0.000000001000002f)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(0.000000001000002f, 0.000000001000001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(0.000000000001002f, 0.000000000001001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(0.000000000001001f, 0.000000000001002f)); } /** Numbers between -1 and 0 */ @Test public void smallNeg() { assertTrue(nearlyEqual(-0.000000001000001f, -0.000000001000002f)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(-0.000000001000002f, -0.000000001000001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-0.000000000001002f, -0.000000000001001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-0.000000000001001f, -0.000000000001002f)); } /** Comparisons involving zero */ @Test public void zero() { assertTrue(nearlyEqual(0.0f, 0.0f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(0.00000001f, 0.0f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(0.0f, 0.00000001f)); } /** Comparisons of numbers on opposite sides of 0 */ @Test public void opposite() { assertFalse(nearlyEqual(1.000000001f, -1.0f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-1.0f, 1.000000001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-1.000000001f, 1.0f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(1.0f, -1.000000001f)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(10000f*Float.MIN_VALUE, -10000f*Float.MIN_VALUE)); } /** * The really tricky part - comparisons of numbers * very close to zero. */ @Test public void ulp() { assertTrue(nearlyEqual(Float.MIN_VALUE, -Float.MIN_VALUE)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(-Float.MIN_VALUE, Float.MIN_VALUE)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(Float.MIN_VALUE, 0)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(0, Float.MIN_VALUE)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(-Float.MIN_VALUE, 0)); assertTrue(nearlyEqual(0, -Float.MIN_VALUE)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(0.000000001f, -Float.MIN_VALUE)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(0.000000001f, Float.MIN_VALUE)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(Float.MIN_VALUE, 0.000000001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(-Float.MIN_VALUE, 0.000000001f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(1e20f*Float.MIN_VALUE, 0.0f)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(0.0f, 1e20f*Float.MIN_VALUE)); assertFalse(nearlyEqual(1e20f*Float.MIN_VALUE, -1e20f*Float.MIN_VALUE)); } }

    Read the article

  • CSS issue with elements spanning columns

    - by bigFoot
    Hi folks. Overview: I'm trying to create a relatively simple page layout detailed below and running into problems no matter how I try to approach it. Concept: - A standard-size-block layout. I'll quote unit widths: each content block is 240px square with 5px of margin around it. - A left column of fixed width of 1 unit (245px - 1 block + margin to left). No problems here. - A right column of variable width to fill the remaining space. No problems here either. - In the left column, a number of 1unit x 1unit blocks fixed down the column. Also some blank space at the top - again, not a problem. - In the right column: a number of free-floating blocks of standard unit-sizes which float around and fill the space given to them by the browser window. No problems here. - Lastly, a single element, 2 units wide, which sits half in the left column and half in the right column, and which the blocks in the right column still float around. Here be dragons. Please see here for a diagram: http://is.gd/bPUGI Problem: No matter how I approach this, it goes wrong. Below is code for my existing attempt at a solution. My current problem is that the 1x1 blocks on the right do not respect the 2x1 block, and as a result half of the 2x1 block is overwritten by a 1x1 block in the right-hand column. I'm aware that this is almost certainly an issue with position: absolute taking things out of flow. However, can't really find a way round that which doesn't just throw up another problem instead. Code: <html> <head> <title>wat</title> <style type="text/css"> body { background: #ccc; color: #000; padding: 0px 5px 5px 0px; margin: 0px; } #leftcol { width: 245px; margin-top: 490px; position: absolute; } #rightcol { left: 245px; position: absolute; } #bigblock { float: left; position: relative; margin-top: -240px; background: red; } .cblock { margin: 5px 0px 0px 5px; float: left; overflow: hidden; display: block; background: #fff; } .w1 { width: 240px; } .w2 { width: 485px; } .l1 { height: 240px; } </head> <body> <div class="cblock w2 l1" id="bigblock"> <h1>DRAGONS</h1> <p>Here be they</p> </div> <div id="leftcol"> <div class="cblock w1 l1"> <h1>Left 1</h1> <p>1x1 block</p> </div> </div> <div id="rightcol"> <div class="cblock w1 l1"> <h1>Right 1</h1> <p>1x1 block</p> </div> <div class="cblock w1 l1"> <h1>Right 2</h1> <p>1x1 block</p> </div> <div class="cblock w1 l1"> <h1>Right 3</h1> <p>1x1 block</p> </div> <div class="cblock w1 l1"> <h1>Right 4</h1> <p>1x1 block</p> </div> <div class="cblock w1 l1"> <h1>Right 5</h1> <p>1x1 block</p> </div> <div class="cblock w1 l1"> <h1>Right 6</h1> <p>1x1 block</p> </div> <div class="cblock w1 l1"> <h1>Right 7</h1> <p>1x1 block</p> </div> </div> </body> </html> Constraints: One final note that I need cross-browser compatibility, though I'm more than happy to enforce this with JS if necessary. That said, if a CSS-only solution exists, I'd be extremely happy. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Ripping CD Audio simultaneously from 2 drives on one PC via USB or PATA - rip accuracy preserved?

    - by Rob
    I'm considering ripping audio (reading audio) from CDs using 2 drives simultaneously to speed up the process of ripping the CDs - i.e. 2 at a time rather than 1. Are there any issues with achieving maximum rip accuracy? In general I wondered if people have tried this and if the simultaneous streams from both rip activities would overload the host machine and cause packet loss or read retries resulting in a sub-standard CD-DA Audio CD rip? If it just means the rip is slightly slower (but still faster than sequentially doing one rip followed by another) but still of maximum accuracy then that is OK for me. I will be using dbPowerAmp to rip the CDs and converting to FLAC lossless format. Specific examples: There are 2 machines I intend to do it on: A Toshiba NB100 1.6Ghz Atom netbook, 2Gb RAM, running Windows XP Home with 1 external LG DVD/CD burner and external 1 LG Blu-ray burner attached via USB 2.0, ripping to the machine's 5400rpm internal hard drive. This rips from one CD drive very well, more than adequate, it is a nippy, fast little machine for its specification. A Desktop PC running Windows 7 Home Premium with MSI P4M900M2-L/ MS-7255v2.0 motherboard and 1.86Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo E6320, 7200rpm hard drive and 2Gb RAM, with an internal LG PATA DVD/CD burner (master) and a Philips DVD/CD burner (slave) on the same PATA bus (perhaps separate buses would be another option to consider here). Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Read half precision float (float16 IEEE 754r) binary data in matlab

    - by Michael
    you have been a great help last time, i hope you can give me some advise this time, too. I read a binary file into matlab with bit16 (format = bitn) and i get a string of ones and zeros. bin = '1 00011 1111111111' (16 bits: 1. sign, 2-6. exponent, 7-16. mantissa) According to ftp://www.fox-toolkit.org/pub/fasthalffloatconversion.pdf it can be 'converted' like out = (-1)^bin(1) * 2^(bin(2:6)-15) * 1.bin(7:16) [are exponent and mantissa still binary?] Can someone help me out and tell me how to deal with the 'eeeee' and '1.mmmmmmmmmm' as mentioned in the pdf, please. Thanks a lot! Michael

    Read the article

  • dividing double by double gives weird results - Java

    - by Aly
    Hi, I am trying to do the following 33.33333333333333/100.0 to get 0.333333333333333 however when I run System.out.println(33.33333333333333/100.0); I get 0.33333333333333326 as the output, similarly when I run System.out.println(33.33333333333333/1000.0); I get 0.033333333333333326 as the output. Does anyone know why, and how I can get the correct value (without loss of decimal places). Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18  | Next Page >