Search Results

Search found 18534 results on 742 pages for 'dave long'.

Page 49/742 | < Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >

  • Elapsed time of running a C program

    - by yCalleecharan
    Hi, I would like to know what lines of C code to add to a program so that it tells me the total time that the program takes to run. I guess there should be counter initialization near the beginning of main and one after the main function ends. Is the right header clock.h? Thanks a lot... Update I have a Win Xp machine. Is it just adding clock() at the beginning and another clock() at the end of the program? Then I can estimate the time difference. Yes, you're right it's time.h. Here's my code: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <math.h> #include <share.h> #include <time.h> void f(long double fb[], long double fA, long double fB); int main() { clock_t start, end; start = clock(); const int ARRAY_SIZE = 11; long double* z = (long double*) malloc(sizeof (long double) * ARRAY_SIZE); int i; long double A, B; if (z == NULL) { printf("Out of memory\n"); exit(-1); } A = 0.5; B = 2; for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++) { z[i] = 0; } z[1] = 5; f(z, A, B); for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++) printf("z is %.16Le\n", z[i]); free(z); z = NULL; end = clock(); printf("Took %ld ticks\n", end-start); printf("Took %f seconds\n", (double)(end-start)/CLOCKS_PER_SEC); return 0; } void f(long double fb[], long double fA, long double fB) { fb[0] = fb[1]* fA; fb[1] = fb[1] - 1; return; } Some errors with MVS2008: testim.c(16) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before 'const' testim.c(18) :error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before 'type' testim.c(20) :error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before 'type' testim.c(21) :error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before 'type' testim.c(23) :error C2065: 'z' : undeclared identifier testim.c(23) :warning C4047: '==' : 'int' differs in levels of indirection from 'void *' testim.c(28) : error C2065: 'A' : undeclared identifier testim.c(28) : warning C4244: '=' : conversion from 'double' to 'int', possible loss of data and it goes to 28 errors. Note that I don't have any errors/warnings without your clock codes. LATEST NEWS: I unfortunately didn't get a good reply here. But after a search on Google, the code is working. Here it is: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <math.h> #include <share.h> #include <time.h> void f(long double fb[], long double fA, long double fB); int main() { clock_t start = clock(); const int ARRAY_SIZE = 11; long double* z = (long double*) malloc(sizeof (long double) * ARRAY_SIZE); int i; long double A, B; if (z == NULL) { printf("Out of memory\n"); exit(-1); } A = 0.5; B = 2; for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++) { z[i] = 0; } z[1] = 5; f(z, A, B); for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE; i++) printf("z is %.16Le\n", z[i]); free(z); z = NULL; printf("Took %f seconds\n", ((double)clock()-start)/CLOCKS_PER_SEC); return 0; } void f(long double fb[], long double fA, long double fB) { fb[0] = fb[1]* fA; fb[1] = fb[1] - 1; return; } Cheers

    Read the article

  • What is an efficient way to erase substrings?

    - by Legend
    I have a long string and a set of <end-index, string> list like the following: long_sentence = "This is a long long long long sentence" indices = [[6, "is"], [8, "is a"], [18, "long"], [23, "long"]] An element 6, "is" indicates that 6 is the end index of the word "is" in the string. I want to get the following string in the end: >> print long_sentence This .... long ......... long sentence" I tried an approach like this: temp = long_sentence for i in indices: temp = temp[:int(i[0]) - len(i[1])] + '.'*(len(i[1])+1) + temp[i[0]+1:] While this seems to be working, it is taking exceptionally long time (more than 6 hours on 5000 strings inside a 300 MB file). Is there a way to speed this up?

    Read the article

  • .NET 3.5SP1 64-bit memory model vs. 32-bit memory model

    - by James Dunne
    As I understand it, the .NET memory model on a 32-bit machine guarantees 32-bit word writes and reads to be atomic operations but does not provide this guarantee on 64-bit words. I have written a quick tool to demonstrate this effect on a Windows XP 32-bit OS and am getting results consistent with that memory model description. However, I have taken this same tool's executable and run it on a Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit OS and am getting wildly different results. Both the machines are identical specs just with different OSes installed. I would have expected that the .NET memory model would guarantee writes and reads to BOTH 32-bit and 64-bit words to be atomic on a 64-bit OS. I find results completely contrary to BOTH assumptions. 32-bit reads and writes are not demonstrated to be atomic on this OS. Can someone explain to me why this fails on a 64-bit OS? Tool code: using System; using System.Threading; namespace ConsoleApplication1 { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var th = new Thread(new ThreadStart(RunThread)); var th2 = new Thread(new ThreadStart(RunThread)); int lastRecordedInt = 0; long lastRecordedLong = 0L; th.Start(); th2.Start(); while (!done) { int newIntValue = intValue; long newLongValue = longValue; if (lastRecordedInt > newIntValue) Console.WriteLine("BING(int)! {0} > {1}, {2}", lastRecordedInt, newIntValue, (lastRecordedInt - newIntValue)); if (lastRecordedLong > newLongValue) Console.WriteLine("BING(long)! {0} > {1}, {2}", lastRecordedLong, newLongValue, (lastRecordedLong - newLongValue)); lastRecordedInt = newIntValue; lastRecordedLong = newLongValue; } th.Join(); th2.Join(); Console.WriteLine("{0} =? {2}, {1} =? {3}", intValue, longValue, Int32.MaxValue / 2, (long)Int32.MaxValue + (Int32.MaxValue / 2)); } private static long longValue = Int32.MaxValue; private static int intValue; private static bool done = false; static void RunThread() { for (int i = 0; i < Int32.MaxValue / 4; ++i) { ++longValue; ++intValue; } done = true; } } } Results on Windows XP 32-bit: Windows XP 32-bit Intel Core2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53GHz BING(long)! 2161093208 > 2161092246, 962 BING(long)! 2162448397 > 2161273312, 1175085 BING(long)! 2270110050 > 2270109040, 1010 BING(long)! 2270115061 > 2270110059, 5002 BING(long)! 2558052223 > 2557528157, 524066 BING(long)! 2571660540 > 2571659563, 977 BING(long)! 2646433569 > 2646432557, 1012 BING(long)! 2660841714 > 2660840732, 982 BING(long)! 2661795522 > 2660841715, 953807 BING(long)! 2712855281 > 2712854239, 1042 BING(long)! 2737627472 > 2735210929, 2416543 1025780885 =? 1073741823, 3168207035 =? 3221225470 Notice how BING(int) is never written and demonstrates that 32-bit reads/writes are atomic on this 32-bit OS. Results on Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit: Windows 7 Enterprise 64-bit Intel Core2 Duo P8700 @ 2.53GHz BING(long)! 2208482159 > 2208121217, 360942 BING(int)! 280292777 > 279704627, 588150 BING(int)! 308158865 > 308131694, 27171 BING(long)! 2549116628 > 2548884894, 231734 BING(int)! 534815527 > 534708027, 107500 BING(int)! 545113548 > 544270063, 843485 BING(long)! 2710030799 > 2709941968, 88831 BING(int)! 668662394 > 667539649, 1122745 1006355562 =? 1073741823, 3154727581 =? 3221225470 Notice that BING(long) AND BING(int) are both displayed! Why are the 32-bit operations failing, let alone the 64-bit ones?

    Read the article

  • How can I adjust the CommandTImeout in DbFit for long running queries?

    - by Ben Farmer
    Is there any way to increase the CommandTimeout for DbFit queries? I have a long running stored procedure that times out when running it in a DbFit Test. It's possible for the procedure to run for a really long time (processing millions of records) and would like to have DbFit wait until it's completed, even if it takes several minutes. We are using the latest version of FitSharp (downloaded it yesterday) and use the version of DbFit that is included with FitSharp.

    Read the article

  • What happens if you kill a long-running alter query?

    - by B T
    What happens if you kill a long-running alter query? Will the alter query simply revert? How long could that take (as a proportion of the time it has already been running)? What if that query is being replicated onto another server? Will killing the process on the other server revert the original server's alter query? We're running mysql

    Read the article

  • How to encrypt/decrypt a long string in PHP?

    - by jodeci
    I doubt if this is encryption but I can't find a better phrase. I need to pass a long query string like this: http://test.com/test.php?key=[some_very_loooooooooooooooooooooooong_query_string] The query string contains NO sensitive information so I'm not really concerned about security in this case. It's just...well, too long and ugly. Is there a library function that can let me encode/encrypt/compress the query string into something similar to the result of a md5() (similar as in, always a 32 character string), but decode/decrypt/decompress-able?

    Read the article

  • How to compress/decompress a long query string in PHP?

    - by jodeci
    I doubt if this is encryption but I can't find a better phrase. I need to pass a long query string like this: http://test.com/test.php?key=[some_very_loooooooooooooooooooooooong_query_string] The query string contains NO sensitive information so I'm not really concerned about security in this case. It's just...well, too long and ugly. Is there a library function that can let me encode/encrypt/compress the query string into something similar to the result of a md5() (similar as in, always a 32 character string), but decode/decrypt/decompress-able?

    Read the article

  • How do I bit shift a long by more than 32 bits?

    - by mach7
    It seems like I should be able to perform bit shift in C/C++ by more than 32 bits provided the left operand of the shift is a long. But this doesn't seem to work, at least with the g++ compiler. Example: unsigned long A = (1L << 37) gives A = 0 which isn't what I want. Am I missing something or is this just not possible? -J

    Read the article

  • Is it better to create methods with a long list of parameters or wrap the parameters into an object?

    - by GigaPr
    Hi, Is it better(what is the best practice) to create methods with a long list of parameters or wrap the parameters into an object? I mean lets say i have a Client data type with a long list of properties and i want to update all the properties at once. is it better to do something like public int Update(int id, string name, string surname, string streetAddress, string streetAddress2, string postcode, string town, string city, string nationality, string age, string gender,string job){ } or wrap all the properties in a object and do something like public int Update(Client client){} thanks

    Read the article

  • How long does it take Google to update all links from R 301 ?

    - by romant
    I just changed the location of my blog, and have done the appropriate redirects. Does anyone have knowledge or experience for the delay in updating all the links across Google? Reason I ask, I wish to change the A record. So this will eliminate the .htaccess file, and thus null and void the redirect. How long must I wait prior to the undertaking? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How long does it take Google to update all links from R 301 ?

    - by romant
    I just changed the location of my blog, and have done the appropriate redirects. Does anyone have knowledge or experience for the delay in updating all the links across Google? Reason I ask, I wish to change the A record. So this will eliminate the .htaccess file, and thus null and void the redirect. How long must I wait prior to the undertaking? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • How long does a typical Windows 7 64bit installation take?

    - by Borek
    On a machine with Intel Core-i5 or i7 and a standard HDD, how long should an installation of Windows 7 64 bit roughly take? I'm after a rough estimate because my installation seems to be running quite slowly (previously, I've installed Win7 32bit on a laptop and it went much quicker but maybe there are differences between 32 and 64 bit editions).

    Read the article

  • Seriousness of a "Smart" disk error. How long will it last?

    - by Workshop Alex
    I have an 1 TB data disk and the bios and Windows are reporting a "Smart" error. At least, I get a Smart event but it doesn't indicate how serious the failure could be. My system is about 6 months old, including the disk so the warranty will cover the damage. Unfortunately, I lack a second disk of 1 TB in size which I can use to make a full backup. The most important data on this disk is safe, but there's a lot of work data which can be regenerated but this would cost a lot of time. So I ordered an USB disk of 1 TB which will arrive in three days. By then I can make a full backup of the data and afterwards, it can crash. But will the disk live that long? (Well, I won't use the PC as long as I can't make a backup.) How serious is such a Smart event? I know it's serious enough to have it replaced, but will it live for another week or could it die any moment?Update: I purchased an 1 TB external disk and spent most of the day making a backup of the 1 TB disk. It survived that. I then received a new disk, since it was still under warranty and replaced the hard disk. Then I had to spend most of a day again to put back the backup. I need to send back the faulty disk and now have an additional external disk, which could always be practical. :-) The Smart Error report did not cause any failures on the original disk. I won't advise to ignore these warnings, but the disk still has enough life in it to last a few more days. (Just make sure you have a good back-up.) And oh, the horror of having to make a complete backup such a huge disk. :-) If your data is important, make sure you have something that supports incremental backups and lots of space. (In my case, the data wasn't very important, just practical to have on-disk together.)

    Read the article

  • How long to install a new RAID 1 pair in linux using hardware RAID?

    - by Roger H
    Hi, I need to install a pair of 1Tb disks into a server that has a hardware RAID card. How long is it likely to take to configure the RAID controller - sticking the disks in is only a 5 minute job, but is there likely to be significant downtime while both disks mirror (even though they are both blank)? Am I looking at 10 minutes over all, or more like 2 hours for this to happen? Thanks

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56  | Next Page >