Search Results

Search found 23001 results on 921 pages for 'binary search tree'.

Page 29/921 | < Previous Page | 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36  | Next Page >

  • Adding binary checkbox values to MySQL database using PHP

    - by klyv
    I'm new to PHP, and I am creating a basic CMS using PHP and MySQL. I'm struggling to get the checkbox information from my HTML page across into the database. How can I make the values to appear as binary 0 or 1 values? The HTML document is written as follows: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> <html> <head> <title>Create your news page</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> </head> <body> <fieldset> <legend>Checked components will show in the page</legend> <form method="POST" action="http://*********.php"> <span class="label">Header</span> <input type="checkbox" name="header" value="HEADER"> <br> <span class="label">Footer</span> <input type="checkbox" name="footer" value="FOOTER"> <hr> <span class="label">Local news</span> <input type="checkbox" name="local" value="LOCALNEWS"> <br> <span class="label">National news</span> <input type="checkbox" name="national" value="NATIONALNEWS"> <br> <span class="label">International news</span> <input type="checkbox" name="international" value="INTERNATIONALNEWS"> <p> <input type="submit"> </form> </fieldset> </body> </html> And the PHP document is written as follows: <?php $user="user_***"; $password="*********"; $database="dbxyz"; mysql_connect("localhost", $user, $password); mysql_select_db($database, $db_handle); mysql_select_db("dbxyz"); if(isset($_POST['layout'])) { foreach($_POST['layout'] as $value { $insert="INSERT INTO layout (header, footer, local, national, international) VALUES ('$value')"; mysql_query($insert); } } ?>

    Read the article

  • Time complexity for Search and Insert operation in sorted and unsorted arrays that includes duplicat

    - by iecut
    1-)For sorted array I have used Binary Search. We know that the worst case complexity for SEARCH operation in sorted array is O(lg N), if we use Binary Search, where N are the number of items in an array. What is the worst case complexity for the search operation in the array that includes duplicate values, using binary search?? Will it be the be the same O(lg N)?? Please correct me if I am wrong!! Also what is the worst case for INSERT operation in sorted array using binary search?? My guess is O(N).... is that right?? 2-) For unsorted array I have used Linear search. Now we have an unsorted array that also accepts duplicate element/values. What are the best worst case complexity for both SEARCH and INSERT operation. I think that we can use linear search that will give us O(N) worst case time for both search and delete operations. Can we do better than this for unsorted array and does the complexity changes if we accepts duplicates in the array.

    Read the article

  • B-Tree Revision

    - by stan
    Hi, If we are looking for line intersections (horizontal and vertical lines only) and we have n lines with half of them vertical and no intersections then Sorting the list of line end points on y value will take N log N using mergesort Each insert delete and search of our data structue (assuming its a b-tree) will be < log n so the total search time will be N log N What am i missing here, if the time to sort using mergesort takes a time of N log N and insert and delete takes a time of < log n are we dropping the constant factor to give an overal time of N log N. If not then how comes < log n goes missing in total ONotation run time? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Select box is not working properly after including google custom search box in web page

    - by Vinay
    I have got a select box and google custom search box in a page, when i choose a option from select box and navigate away from the page and again if i come back to the same page the option will not be selected (violates the default functionality of select box), The code is below <script src="https://www.google.com/jsapi" type="text/javascript"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> google.load('search', '1', {language : 'en'}); google.setOnLoadCallback(function() { var customSearchControl = new google.search.CustomSearchControl('004920913350056953771:kpkclvhujzk'); customSearchControl.setResultSetSize(google.search.Search.FILTERED_CSE_RESULTSET); var options = new google.search.DrawOptions(); options.setAutoComplete(true); options.enableSearchboxOnly("<?=$homeurl?>my_results.php", "query"); customSearchControl.draw('cse-search-form', options); }, true); </script> <select multiple="yes"> <option>1</option> <option>2</option> </select> If i remove the custom search script, the select box selected option will be retained even after navigating away from the page. (default functionality) Its working fine in chrome, IE but not in Firefox. Is there any solution for this, so that select box must work fine even in the presence of search box, but the order must be same 1) Search box 2)Select Box

    Read the article

  • Binary data from a serial port in linux using c

    - by user1680393
    I am reading binary data from a serial port on Phidget sbc using Linux to get a command from an application running on a PC. I wrote a test program in VB to read the data into a byte array and convert it to decimal to use it but can’t figure out how to do it in c. I am unable to come up with anything with the research I have done on the internet. Command sent from PC is 0x0F. To check if I am getting correct data I read the data and send it back. Here is what I get back. Returned data has a carriage return added to it. Hex Display 0F00 0000 0D ‘\’ Display \0F\00\00\00\r Normal display just display a strange character. This tells me that the data is there that I can use, but can’t figure out to extract the value 0F or 15. How can I convert the incoming data to use it? I tried converting the received data using strtol, but it returns 0. I also tried setting the port to raw but it did not make any difference. unsigned char buffer1[1]; int ReadPort1() { int result; result = read(file1, &buffer1,1); if(result > 0) { WritePort1(buffer1); sprintf(tempstr, "Port1 data %s %d", buffer1, result); DisplayText(2,tempstr); } return result; } Port Open/Setup void OpenPort1() { //file1 = open("/dev/ttyUSB1", O_RDWR | O_NOCTTY | O_NONBLOCK); file1 = open("/dev/ttyUSB1", O_RDWR | O_NOCTTY | O_NODELAY); if(file1 < 0) printf("Error opening serial port1.\n"); else { SetPort(file1, 115200, 8, 1, 0, 1); port1open = 1; } } void SetPort(int fd, int Baud_Rate, int Data_Bits, int Stop_Bits, int Parity, int raw) { long BAUD; // derived baud rate from command line long DATABITS; long STOPBITS; long PARITYON; long PARITY; struct termios newtio; switch (Baud_Rate) { case 115200: BAUD = B115200; break; case 38400: BAUD = B38400; break; case 19200: BAUD = B19200; break; case 9600: BAUD = B9600; break; } //end of switch baud_rate switch (Data_Bits) { case 8: default: DATABITS = CS8; break; case 7: DATABITS = CS7; break; case 6: DATABITS = CS6; break; case 5: DATABITS = CS5; break; } //end of switch data_bits switch (Stop_Bits) { case 1: default: STOPBITS = 0; break; case 2: STOPBITS = CSTOPB; break; } //end of switch stop bits switch (Parity) { case 0: default: //none PARITYON = 0; PARITY = 0; break; case 1: //odd PARITYON = PARENB; PARITY = PARODD; break; case 2: //even PARITYON = PARENB; PARITY = 0; break; } //end of switch parity newtio.c_cflag = BAUD | DATABITS | STOPBITS | PARITYON | PARITY | CLOCAL | CREAD; newtio.c_iflag = IGNPAR; if(raw == 1) { newtio.c_oflag &= ~OPOST; newtio.c_lflag &= ~(ICANON | ECHO | ECHOE | ISIG); } else { newtio.c_lflag = 0; //ICANON; newtio.c_oflag = 0; } newtio.c_cc[VMIN]=1; newtio.c_cc[VTIME]=0; tcflush(fd, TCIFLUSH); tcsetattr(fd,TCSANOW,&newtio); }

    Read the article

  • Algorithms to find longest common prefix in a sliding window.

    - by nn
    Hi, I have written a Lempel Ziv compressor and decompressor. I am seeking to improve the time to search the dictionary for a phrase. I have considered K-M-P and Boyer-Moore, but I think an algorithm that adapts to changes in the dictionary would be faster. I've been reading that binary search trees (AVL or with splays) improve the performance of compression time considerably. What I fail to understand is how to bootstrap the binary search tree and insert/remove data. I'm not actually quite sure the significance of each node in the binary search. I am searching for phrases so will each character be considered a node? Also how and what is inserted/removed from the search tree as new data enters the dictionary and old data is removed? The binary search tree sounds like a good payoff since it can adapt to the dictionary, but I'm just not quite sure of how it's used.

    Read the article

  • retrieving of coordinates from google search?

    - by cheesebunz
    Is there anyway of retrieving coordinates through google search? right now my search is able to have markers on the map, but however i do not have any idea how to retrieve coordinates through just the search api alone. I have a html page named mapsToolKit.html and two js scripts with maps.js and search.js, i want the coding to be in search.js, so far i have managed to done in the maps section but is there anyway to retrieve it back through the search.js part?

    Read the article

  • How can I make keyword order more relevant in my search?

    - by Atomiton
    In my database, I have a keywords field that stores a comma-delimited list of keywords. For example, a Shrek doll might have the following keywords: ogre, green, plush, hero, boys' toys A "Beanie Baby" doll ( that happens to be an ogre ) might have: beanie baby, kids toys, beanbag toys, soft, infant, ogre (That's a completely contrived example.) What I'd like to do is if the consumer searches for "ogre" I'd like the "Shrek" doll to come up higher in the search results. My content administrator feels that if the keyword is earlier in the list, it should get a higher ranking. ( This makes sense to me and it makes it easy for me to let them control the search result relevance ). Here's a simplified query: SELECT p.ProductID AS ContentID , p.ProductName AS Title , p.ProductCode AS Subtitle , 100 AS Rank , p.ProductKeywords AS Keywords FROM Products AS p WHERE FREETEXT( p.ProductKeywords, @SearchPredicate ) I'm thinking something along the lines of replacing the RANK with: , 200 - INDEXOF(@SearchTerm) AS Rank This "should" rank the keyword results by their relevance I know INDEXOF isn't a SQL command... but it's something LIKE that I would like to accomplish. Am I approaching this the right way? Is it possible to do something like this? Does this make sense?

    Read the article

  • Full Text Search like Google

    - by Eduardo
    I would like to implement full-text-search in my off-line (android) application to search the user generated list of notes. I would like it to behave just like Google (since most people are already used to querying to Google) My initial requirements are: Fast: like Google or as fast as possible, having 100000 documents with 200 hundred words each. Searching for two words should only return documents that contain both words (not just one word) (unless the OR operator is used) Case insensitive (aka: normalization): If I have the word 'Hello' and I search for 'hello' it should match. Diacritical mark insensitive: If I have the word 'así' a search for 'asi' should match. In Spanish, many people, incorrectly, either do not put diacritical marks or fail in correctly putting them. Stop word elimination: To not have a huge index meaningless words like 'and', 'the' or 'for' should not be indexed at all. Dictionary substitution (aka: stem words): Similar words should be indexed as one. For example, instances of 'hungrily' and 'hungry' should be replaced with 'hunger'. Phrase search: If I have the text 'Hello world!' a search of '"world hello"' should not match it but a search of '"hello world"' should match. Search all fields (in multifield documents) if no field specified (not just a default field) Auto-completion in search results while typing to give popular searches. (just like Google Suggest) How may I configure a full-text-search engine to behave as much as possible as Google? (I am mostly interested in Open Source, Java and in particular Lucene)

    Read the article

  • Twitter Search API Question

    - by supermogx
    I'm using the twitter search API to get twitter posts based on some keywords, using AND and OR keyword. It works OK, but I seem to get problems using hashtags... For example : Not returning any results : http://search.twitter.com/search.json?q="%23ipad+AND+%23ipod"+OR+"%23joke+AND+%23funny"&rpp=100&callback=? Returning results : http://search.twitter.com/search.json?q="ipad+AND+ipod"+OR+"joke+AND+funny"&rpp=100&callback=? But there's results with #ipod AND #ipad because when I search only for #ipod, I can see a lot of posts with both hashtags. Example : http://search.twitter.com/search.json?q=%23ipad&rpp=100&callback=? P.S. %23 = # Any idea?

    Read the article

  • Outlook 2010 keeps losing the search index for emails

    - by Igor K
    Hoping someone can help here, this is driving me insane. Outlook 2010 keeps losing the search index so when I search for an email it has the yellow bar saying: search results may be incomplete because items are still being indexed Clicking on the bar says eg: 49200 items remaining to be indexed If it makes any difference, this is an IMAP account. If I leave Outlook open all day it will eventually index everything. But then say a week/month later it happens all again.

    Read the article

  • Search inside of text files

    - by Matt
    So here is the situation. I currently run a mail server for my small non-profit company. My mail server (Merak Mail Server) keeps logs in .log files and mail as .tmp files. Essentially these are just text files that are kept on the server. Problem is that when I put text into the "Containing text" field on Windows Explorer, it always misses the files and tells me no results returned. Then when I search the files one by one (painful at best), I find the files I need. Do I not understand the search feature well enough, or maybe I have it indexing wrong. I really don't care what I need to use to search the files, even a third-party app is fine with me, I just want to type an email address into a box and search all of my log files or email files and find out which one I am looking for. It can be Windows Search or something else, as long as I can find a way to get the job done I will be happy. Pay solutions are fine as well. Thanks everyone in advance.

    Read the article

  • Outlook Search Folder - Unread Mail in shared mailbox

    - by Garrett
    I have a user who is trying to configure the Unread Mail search folder for a shared mailbox in Outlook 2007. I believe last time we accomplished this by doing an advanced find, and saving the search. However, on this computer I can't search more than one folder of the shared mailbox at a time. Everything I have read online says this isn't possible, but we have one user who has it set up and working perfectly. There's no additional software or indexing, not even Windows Desktop Search 4.0 updates installed.

    Read the article

  • How to reverse-i-search back and forth?

    - by m-ric
    I use reverse-i-search often, and that's cool. Sometime though when pressing Ctrl+r multiple times, I pass the command I am actually looking for. Because Ctrl+r searches backward in history, from newest to oldest, I have to: cancel, search again and stop exactly at the command, without passing it. While in reverse-i-search prompt, is it possible to search forward, i.e. from where I stand to newest. I naively tried Ctrl+shift+r, no luck. I heard about Ctrl+g but this is not what I am expecting here. Anyone has an idea?

    Read the article

  • Search inside of text files

    - by Matt
    So here is the situation. I currently run a mail server for my small non-profit company. My mail server (Merak Mail Server) keeps logs in .log files and mail as .tmp files. Essentially these are just text files that are kept on the server. Problem is that when I put text into the "Containing text" field on Windows Explorer, it always misses the files and tells me no results returned. Then when I search the files one by one (painful at best), I find the files I need. Do I not understand the search feature well enough, or maybe I have it indexing wrong. I really don't care what I need to use to search the files, even a third-party app is fine with me, I just want to type an email address into a box and search all of my log files or email files and find out which one I am looking for. It can be Windows Search or something else, as long as I can find a way to get the job done I will be happy. Pay solutions are fine as well. Thanks everyone in advance.

    Read the article

  • Lightweight outlook search

    - by Simon Johnson
    Does anybody know of a plugin for Outlook 2003 that makes the search fast and accurate? I tried using Microsoft Search and Google Desktop Search but I find that these product slow down my development machine too much. I heard of Lookout but it appears that Microsoft has pulled it.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to have a working search bar in Explorer with Windows Search Service disabled?

    - by Desmond Hume
    I had to disable Windows Search Service (turn it off in Windows Features) for the reason that it was constantly using the hard drive in an excessive way (maybe because I've got very large quantities of files on my PC), noticeably slowing down my computer, and the Windows.edb database file grew way too large, about 2.5 GB in size. But the side-effect of it is that now the search bar is gone from any Explorer window and I miss this useful feature. So my question is, is there a way to stop Windows Search Service torturing my hard drive and still being able to search for files and folders directly from Explorer, perhaps using some third-party software?

    Read the article

  • Combine Windows 8 app and settings search?

    - by askvictor
    While I've adapted to most things in windows 8 quite easily, I miss the 'combined' search feature of win 7 where pressing Win then typing would bring up all of the applications, settings and files (not that I ever really used the files part). Now, if I want to search settings I press win, start typing, then have to press the down arrow twice, then enter, then find the setting I want (I know I could press win-w, but that's just another thing to remember). Is there any way to bring back the 'unified search'?

    Read the article

  • Windows Search not searching in files

    - by Cylindric
    I am trying to get Windows Search to work on my Windows Server 2008 SP2 fileserver, so I can search in files for content. I have added the Windows Search Service role to the server, and using the right-click properties in Explorer set some folders to "Index this location". The problem is that neither on the server or remotely can I search in the files. I seem to get some inconsistencies in the GUIs, for example the "Indexing Options" panel shows me just 6 locations indexed, but if I click "Modify" I see nearly everything ticked. For example, the "SeachTest" folder under "infrastructure" has the "index this location" option ticked, but the "Projects" folder does not. I assume this is why some are grey and some not, but they are all ticked. T The "SearchTest" folder contains some files that have nothing but the text PurpleOrange in it, so I should be able to find those. So, to summarise: Which locations are indexed? The ones in the "Index these locations" list, the ones ticked, or the ones not greyed-out in the list? How do I get to the state where I can click in the search box and type PurpleOrange and see the files?

    Read the article

  • Outlook 2010 search stopped working with Exchange 2007

    - by Steve Hiner
    The quick search feature in Outlook 2010 used to work fine. We switched the computers over from a workgroup so that they are on the domain with our new server. We then copied all the email from the old PST file into the new Exchange based folders. Since we did that 3 of the 4 computers can't search email using Outlook's awesome search boxes. One of them works perfectly fine. Any idea what might have happened? There are only 5 users on the network and it's a pretty burly server for such a small network, I can't imagine the server is still indexing their mail. Is the quick search something that has to be turned on or might it be related to the permissions change from a non-domain user to a standard domain user?

    Read the article

  • How to Modify Windows 7 Search to Index Removable Drives

    - by AMissico
    I have over 8GB in my "Code Library" that I maintain on a 64GB "ScanDisk Ultra Backup USB Device". Windows Search 4.0 (installed on Windows XP) can index removable drives, but Windows 7 (which uses Windows Search 4.0) cannot because the USB device identifies itself as a "Removable" drive and Windows 7 refuses to index removable drives. How can I modify Windows 7 Search to index removable drives? All suggestions welcome and greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Building intranet search

    - by gmkv
    At work, we have lots of information squirreled away in many different sites -- wikis, product docs, ticketing system, etc -- many of which require authentication. I'm very interested in having a single way to search all our various silos, and in my spare time have looked at Nutch, Grub, Django + Haystack, etc. None of these is a complete solution a la Google Mini or Google Search Appliance. Has anybody built a basic intranet search engine out of a mixture of these tools? Would you have recommendations about how to go about it? I like Django, and Haystack seems to be a mildly popular search solution for it, but I'd need to wire up a crawler that can support crawling authenticated sites to it.

    Read the article

  • Firefox - order of search engines reverts (toolbar)

    - by Victor78
    When I change the order of the search engines (Toolbar - Manage Search Engines - Move up / down - Ok) it changes the order, until I close and reopen the browser. I can't imagine that's the way it's supposed to work. I want it to stay in the order I select. I have no add-ons installed that have anything to do with search engines, nor that add any toolbars. I am not using a customized theme. Apparently this problem is rare, as Googling [ "manage search engine list" ("order reverts" OR "order changes") ] return 0 results. Firefox 3.6.12; Windows XP Pro SP3.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36  | Next Page >