Search Results

Search found 59194 results on 2368 pages for 'depth first search'.

Page 5/2368 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Personal search – the future of search

    - by jamiet
    [Four months ago I wrote a meandering blog post on another blogging site entitled Personal search – the future of search. The points I made therein are becoming more relevant to what I'm reading about and hoping to get involved in in the future so I'm re-posting here to a wider audience to hopefully get some more feedback and guage reaction to it. This has been prompted by the book Pull by David Siegel that is forming my current holiday reading (recommended to me by a commenter on my previous post Interesting things – Twitter annotations and your phone as a web server) and in particular by Siegel's notion of us all in the future having a personal online data vault.] My one-time colleague Paul Dawson recently wrote an article called The Future of Search and in it he proposed some interesting ideas. Some choice quotes: The growth of Chinese search giant Baidu is an indicator that fully localised and tailored content and offerings have great traction with local audiences This trend is already driving an increase in the use of specialist searches … Look at how Farecast is now integrated into Bing for example, or how Flightstats is now integrated into Google. Search does not necessarily have to begin with a keyword, but could start instead with a click or a touch. Take a look at Retrievr. Start drawing a picture in the box and see what happens. This is certainly search without the need for typing in keywords search technology has advanced greatly in recent years. The recent launch of Microsoft Live Labs’ Pivot has given us a taste of what we can expect to see in the future This really got me thinking about where search might go in the future and as my mind wandered I realised that as the amount of data that we collect about ourselves increases so too will the need and the desire to search it. The amount of electronic data that exists about each and every person is increasing and in the near future I fully expect that we are going to be able to store personal data such as: A history of our location (in fact Google Latitude already offers this facility) Recordings of all our phone conversations Health information history (weight, blood pressure etc…) Energy usage Spending history What films we watch, what radio stations we listen to Voting history Of course, most of this stuff is already stored somewhere but crucially we don’t have easy access to it. My utilities supplier knows how much electricity I’m using but if I want to know for myself I have to go and dig through my statements (assuming I have kept them). Similarly my doctor probably has ready access to all of my health records, my bank knows exactly what I have spent my money on, my cable supplier knows what I watch on TV and my mobile phone supplier probably knows exactly where I am and where I’ve been for the past few years. Strange then that none of this electronic information is available to me in a way that I can really make use of it; after all, its MY information. Its MY data. I created it. That is set to change. As technologies mature and customers become more technically cognizant they will demand more access to the data that companies hold about them. The companies themselves will realise the benefit that they derive from giving users what they want and will embrace ways of providing it. As a result the amount of data that we store about ourselves is going to increase exponentially and the desire to search and derive value from that data is going to grow with it; we are about to enter the era of the “personal datastore” and we will want, and need, to search through it in order to make sense of it all. Its interesting then that today when we think of search we think of search engines and yet in these personal datastores we’re referring to data that search engines can’t touch because WE own it and we (hopefully) choose to keep it private. Someone, I know not who, is going to lead in this space by making it easy for us to search our data and retrieve information that we have either forgotten or maybe didn’t even know in the first place. We will learn new things about ourselves and about our habits; we will share these findings with whomever we choose; we will compare what we discover with others; we will collaborate for mutual benefit and, most of all, we will educate ourselves as to how to live our lives better. Search will be the means to that end, it will enable us to make sense of the wealth of information that we will collect day in day out. The future of search is personal, why would we be interested in anything else? @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Personal search – the future of search

    - by jamiet
    [Four months ago I wrote a meandering blog post on another blogging site entitled Personal search – the future of search. The points I made therein are becoming more relevant to what I'm reading about and hoping to get involved in in the future so I'm re-posting here to a wider audience to hopefully get some more feedback and guage reaction to it. This has been prompted by the book Pull by David Siegel that is forming my current holiday reading (recommended to me by a commenter on my previous post Interesting things – Twitter annotations and your phone as a web server) and in particular by Siegel's notion of us all in the future having a personal online data vault.] My one-time colleague Paul Dawson recently wrote an article called The Future of Search and in it he proposed some interesting ideas. Some choice quotes: The growth of Chinese search giant Baidu is an indicator that fully localised and tailored content and offerings have great traction with local audiences This trend is already driving an increase in the use of specialist searches … Look at how Farecast is now integrated into Bing for example, or how Flightstats is now integrated into Google. Search does not necessarily have to begin with a keyword, but could start instead with a click or a touch. Take a look at Retrievr. Start drawing a picture in the box and see what happens. This is certainly search without the need for typing in keywords search technology has advanced greatly in recent years. The recent launch of Microsoft Live Labs’ Pivot has given us a taste of what we can expect to see in the future This really got me thinking about where search might go in the future and as my mind wandered I realised that as the amount of data that we collect about ourselves increases so too will the need and the desire to search it. The amount of electronic data that exists about each and every person is increasing and in the near future I fully expect that we are going to be able to store personal data such as: A history of our location (in fact Google Latitude already offers this facility) Recordings of all our phone conversations Health information history (weight, blood pressure etc…) Energy usage Spending history What films we watch, what radio stations we listen to Voting history Of course, most of this stuff is already stored somewhere but crucially we don’t have easy access to it. My utilities supplier knows how much electricity I’m using but if I want to know for myself I have to go and dig through my statements (assuming I have kept them). Similarly my doctor probably has ready access to all of my health records, my bank knows exactly what I have spent my money on, my cable supplier knows what I watch on TV and my mobile phone supplier probably knows exactly where I am and where I’ve been for the past few years. Strange then that none of this electronic information is available to me in a way that I can really make use of it; after all, its MY information. Its MY data. I created it. That is set to change. As technologies mature and customers become more technically cognizant they will demand more access to the data that companies hold about them. The companies themselves will realise the benefit that they derive from giving users what they want and will embrace ways of providing it. As a result the amount of data that we store about ourselves is going to increase exponentially and the desire to search and derive value from that data is going to grow with it; we are about to enter the era of the “personal datastore” and we will want, and need, to search through it in order to make sense of it all. Its interesting then that today when we think of search we think of search engines and yet in these personal datastores we’re referring to data that search engines can’t touch because WE own it and we (hopefully) choose to keep it private. Someone, I know not who, is going to lead in this space by making it easy for us to search our data and retrieve information that we have either forgotten or maybe didn’t even know in the first place. We will learn new things about ourselves and about our habits; we will share these findings with whomever we choose; we will compare what we discover with others; we will collaborate for mutual benefit and, most of all, we will educate ourselves as to how to live our lives better. Search will be the means to that end, it will enable us to make sense of the wealth of information that we will collect day in day out. The future of search is personal, why would we be interested in anything else? @Jamiet Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Which is better for search engines, repeated phrases or different phrases with the same meaning?

    - by George Botros
    When I'm designing an ads website I have two options: Let the advertiser to choose from some predefined lists to create the new ad. For Example: product list ( T-Shirt, Shorts, Suit, .....) Color list ( Black, Red, .....) Let the advertiser to write his own descriptive content for the product For Example "Amazing suit with a good price" I like the first Scenario but which is better for search engine optimization [SEO], repeated phrases or different phrases with the same meaning? Note : assuming each page will contain one or more ads

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to tell a search engine not to index a specific section of an HTML page? [closed]

    - by Justin
    Possible Duplicate: Preventing robots from crawling specific part of a page I know you can use robots.txt to ignore entire pages or sections of your site, but is there a way to tell cralwers like the Googlebot to ignore specific sections of an HTML page? I found this blog post that discusses one method, but it appears only to work for the Google Search Appliance, not the Googlebot. Is there some method for at least Google for to do this?

    Read the article

  • Small Business Server 2008 - Microsoft Windows Search or Microsoft Search Server 2020 Express

    - by Christopher Edwards
    See Also - Small (Business) Server - Microsoft Windows Search or Microsoft Search Server 2008 Express Can anyone tell me if they have Search Server Express 2010 Beta working on Small Business Server 2010, or indeed if it is supported. The only reference I can find is here, but given how scant it is I'm not sure I should trust it:- http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en/sharepoint2010setup/thread/12cf9846-b940-4441-9fc1-30016ea87e5c

    Read the article

  • Search for files after a relative date using Windows search

    - by Zoredache
    I am looking for a way to save a search that includes a relative date. Specifically I am looking for a way to save a search that matches files that have a modification date that is 7 days ago. I have read the Windows Search Advanced Query Syntax document and I am not seeing a way to say 7 days ago. The numbers and ranges section does mention that relative dates are possible. The problem is that the relative dates described there do not fit the criteria I need. The lastweek almost looks like what I want except if I run a query like after:lastweek on a Monday it will only show my file that have been modified since Sunday at 12:00. The lastweek/lastmonth seem to relative to the start of the week/month which is not what I need. Multi-word relative dates: week, next month, last week, past month, or coming year. The values can also be entered contracted, as follows: thisweek, nextmonth, lastweek, pastmonth, comingyear. One nice thing about saved searches is that they are stored as an XML document and the file format is documented. I am not seeing how to form a correct value for a datetime. If I was able to understand this format, I suspect I could use a text editor and created a saved search that does what I want. Fragment from the examples: <conditions> <condition type="leafCondition" valuetype="System.StructuredQueryType.DateTime" property="System.DateModified" operator="imp" value="R00UUUUUUUUZZXD-30NU" propertyType="wstr" /> </conditions> To summarize I am looking for an answer to one or both of these questions How do I make a query for '7 days ago' using the standard syntax? How is the DateTime stored in a saved search?

    Read the article

  • Adding arbitrary search URLs to Firefox search bar

    - by Matthew
    New-ish versions of Firefox (I'm currently on 3.6) have the nifty "search bookmark" feature, which allows you to create searches in the location bar with custom URLs, e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%s. This is really great, but when trying to mange the engines in the search bar, I was dismayed at the lack of customisability there. It looks like the two search methods are entirely distinct. Is there a way to put custom URLs in my search bar, or do I have to just hope that whatever I want is on the long but finite list of plugins at mycroft? Thanks UPDATE: done a bit more research, posting my own answer

    Read the article

  • How should I handle search engines auto-correcting the spelling of a site's name?

    - by Nathan G.
    A client's site and company is called 'Tranin Communications' (Tranin is her last name). It ranks well in searches for her name but rather poorly in searches for the name of her site/company. I realized that this is largely due to* search engines (Google especially) assuming that the query was misspelled and automatically including results for both 'train communications' and 'communications training'. Both of those queries yield many high-ranking sites that completely drown out hers. Sometimes Google even shows results for 'communications training' instead of 'tranin communications', hiding her site altogether. Is there a way to report an incorrect auto-correction to Google or something I can do to discourage this behavior (e.g. a meta tag)? My searches have come up cold, any suggestions would be appreciated. *I've come to this conclusion because her site ranks very highly when the same queries are put in quotes.

    Read the article

  • Use of another country domain name can influence search engines results?

    - by DontVoteMeDown
    I'm studing a way to create my company domain based on it's name. Consider that my company's name is Another Store and I want to register a domain like anothersto.re - this is just an example. That domain is strictly chosen by marketing. What happens is that my company is stabilished in Brazil and our domain here is .br. The .re domain stands for an island near France so haves nothing to do with my country. If that domain is chosen what it can imply about SEO questions? Did it will have any influence on search engines results considering that they look over user's region? This kind of domain use became common between modern companies - and marketing strategies - and that is why I'm considering it.

    Read the article

  • How can I search in transcluded categories?

    - by Wikis
    I want to add functionality to a MediaWiki wiki to search in specific categories: Platform 1 Platform 2 etc. So I created a template which, based on a certain field, assigns pages to those categories. The template was already included on most of these pages. So now most pages are in either: Category:Platform 1 or Category:Platform 2 Then I thought I just need to add incategory to the search and I'm done, as described on the Wikipedia page. But then I reread it and to my horror discovered: incategory: – using the incategory: parameter returns pages in a given category (as long as the pages are directly categorized, and not transcluded through templates). Eeeek! Is there any other way to search even in transcluded templates? Or any other way of resolving this?

    Read the article

  • Entity Association Mapping with Code First Part 1 : Mapping Complex Types

    - by mortezam
    Last week the CTP5 build of the new Entity Framework Code First has been released by data team at Microsoft. Entity Framework Code-First provides a pretty powerful code-centric way to work with the databases. When it comes to associations, it brings ultimate flexibility. I’m a big fan of the EF Code First approach and am planning to explain association mapping with code first in a series of blog posts and this one is dedicated to Complex Types. If you are new to Code First approach, you can find a great walkthrough here. In order to build a solid foundation for our discussion, we will start by learning about some of the core concepts around the relationship mapping.   What is Mapping?Mapping is the act of determining how objects and their relationships are persisted in permanent data storage, in our case, relational databases. What is Relationship mapping?A mapping that describes how to persist a relationship (association, aggregation, or composition) between two or more objects. Types of RelationshipsThere are two categories of object relationships that we need to be concerned with when mapping associations. The first category is based on multiplicity and it includes three types: One-to-one relationships: This is a relationship where the maximums of each of its multiplicities is one. One-to-many relationships: Also known as a many-to-one relationship, this occurs when the maximum of one multiplicity is one and the other is greater than one. Many-to-many relationships: This is a relationship where the maximum of both multiplicities is greater than one. The second category is based on directionality and it contains two types: Uni-directional relationships: when an object knows about the object(s) it is related to but the other object(s) do not know of the original object. To put this in EF terminology, when a navigation property exists only on one of the association ends and not on the both. Bi-directional relationships: When the objects on both end of the relationship know of each other (i.e. a navigation property defined on both ends). How Object Relationships Are Implemented in POCO domain models?When the multiplicity is one (e.g. 0..1 or 1) the relationship is implemented by defining a navigation property that reference the other object (e.g. an Address property on User class). When the multiplicity is many (e.g. 0..*, 1..*) the relationship is implemented via an ICollection of the type of other object. How Relational Database Relationships Are Implemented? Relationships in relational databases are maintained through the use of Foreign Keys. A foreign key is a data attribute(s) that appears in one table and must be the primary key or other candidate key in another table. With a one-to-one relationship the foreign key needs to be implemented by one of the tables. To implement a one-to-many relationship we implement a foreign key from the “one table” to the “many table”. We could also choose to implement a one-to-many relationship via an associative table (aka Join table), effectively making it a many-to-many relationship. Introducing the ModelNow, let's review the model that we are going to use in order to implement Complex Type with Code First. It's a simple object model which consist of two classes: User and Address. Each user could have one billing address. The Address information of a User is modeled as a separate class as you can see in the UML model below: In object-modeling terms, this association is a kind of aggregation—a part-of relationship. Aggregation is a strong form of association; it has some additional semantics with regard to the lifecycle of objects. In this case, we have an even stronger form, composition, where the lifecycle of the part is fully dependent upon the lifecycle of the whole. Fine-grained domain models The motivation behind this design was to achieve Fine-grained domain models. In crude terms, fine-grained means “more classes than tables”. For example, a user may have both a billing address and a home address. In the database, you may have a single User table with the columns BillingStreet, BillingCity, and BillingPostalCode along with HomeStreet, HomeCity, and HomePostalCode. There are good reasons to use this somewhat denormalized relational model (performance, for one). In our object model, we can use the same approach, representing the two addresses as six string-valued properties of the User class. But it’s much better to model this using an Address class, where User has the BillingAddress and HomeAddress properties. This object model achieves improved cohesion and greater code reuse and is more understandable. Complex Types: Splitting a Table Across Multiple Types Back to our model, there is no difference between this composition and other weaker styles of association when it comes to the actual C# implementation. But in the context of ORM, there is a big difference: A composed class is often a candidate Complex Type. But C# has no concept of composition—a class or property can’t be marked as a composition. The only difference is the object identifier: a complex type has no individual identity (i.e. no AddressId defined on Address class) which make sense because when it comes to the database everything is going to be saved into one single table. How to implement a Complex Types with Code First Code First has a concept of Complex Type Discovery that works based on a set of Conventions. The convention is that if Code First discovers a class where a primary key cannot be inferred, and no primary key is registered through Data Annotations or the fluent API, then the type will be automatically registered as a complex type. Complex type detection also requires that the type does not have properties that reference entity types (i.e. all the properties must be scalar types) and is not referenced from a collection property on another type. Here is the implementation: public class User{    public int UserId { get; set; }    public string FirstName { get; set; }    public string LastName { get; set; }    public string Username { get; set; }    public Address Address { get; set; }} public class Address {     public string Street { get; set; }     public string City { get; set; }            public string PostalCode { get; set; }        }public class EntityMappingContext : DbContext {     public DbSet<User> Users { get; set; }        } With code first, this is all of the code we need to write to create a complex type, we do not need to configure any additional database schema mapping information through Data Annotations or the fluent API. Database SchemaThe mapping result for this object model is as follows: Limitations of this mappingThere are two important limitations to classes mapped as Complex Types: Shared references is not possible: The Address Complex Type doesn’t have its own database identity (primary key) and so can’t be referred to by any object other than the containing instance of User (e.g. a Shipping class that also needs to reference the same User Address). No elegant way to represent a null reference There is no elegant way to represent a null reference to an Address. When reading from database, EF Code First always initialize Address object even if values in all mapped columns of the complex type are null. This means that if you store a complex type object with all null property values, EF Code First returns a initialized complex type when the owning entity object is retrieved from the database. SummaryIn this post we learned about fine-grained domain models which complex type is just one example of it. Fine-grained is fully supported by EF Code First and is known as the most important requirement for a rich domain model. Complex type is usually the simplest way to represent one-to-one relationships and because the lifecycle is almost always dependent in such a case, it’s either an aggregation or a composition in UML. In the next posts we will revisit the same domain model and will learn about other ways to map a one-to-one association that does not have the limitations of the complex types. References ADO.NET team blog Mapping Objects to Relational Databases Java Persistence with Hibernate

    Read the article

  • Is there a search engine that indexes source code of a web-page?

    - by Dexter
    I need to search the web for sites that are in our industry that use the same Adwords management company, to ensure that the said company is not violating our contract, as they have been accused of doing. They use a tracking code in the template of every page which has a certain domain in the URL, and I'm wondering if it's possible "Google" the source code using some bot that crawls the code rather than the content? For example, I bought an unlimited license for an image gallery, and I was asked to type the license number in a comment just before the script. I thought it was just so a human could look at the source and find out if someone paid, but it turned out that it was actually that they had a crawler looking for their source code and that comment. If it ran across the code on your site, it would look for the comment, and if it found one, it would check to see if it was an existing one. If not, it would first notify you of your noncompliance, and then notify the owner of the script. Edit: I'm looking to index HTML and JavaScript only, not the server-side languages or Java.

    Read the article

  • Depth is disabled - How to turn on?

    - by marc wellman
    In XNA 3.1 is there any other way to disable depth in 3D Worlds using DirectX models other than GraphicsDevice.RenderState.DepthBufferEnable = false; ? The reason for my question is I have quite a huge program which offers a 3D World with a couple of 3D DirectX models inside. Depth was never an issue since it ever worked fine but since a few days after doing some modifications my models are all depth-translucent i.e. depth-buffering and/or culling seems to be disabled. But in my whole source code I never touch any of the options related to Depth or Culling which means I never turn these settings on explicitly nor turn it off somewhere. So I am searching for some other statement maybe related to the GraphicsDevice that implicitly turns depth off - but I can't find it. (Sorry that I don't post any source code but I have too much source code and I simply don't know where to search) UPDATE: These are a couple of simple objects seen with correct depth. These are the same objects in their current state.

    Read the article

  • 404 code/header for search engines, on removed user content?

    - by mowgli
    I just got an email, from a former user on my website He was complaining that Google still shows the contact page he created on my site, even though he deleted it a month ago This is the first time in many years anyone requests this I told him, that it's almost entirely up to Google what content it wants to keep/show and for how long. If it's deleted on the site, I can't do much, other than request a re-visit from the googlebot The user-page already now says something like "Not found. The user has removed the content" TL;DR: But the question is: Should I generally add a 404 header (or other) for dynamic user content that has been removed from the site? Or could this hurt the site (SEO)?

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 search - sucky?

    - by Scott Evernden
    Is there an alternative to trying to remember all the advanced search options? Like an actual GUI as we had for windows XP? As powerful as Windows Search apparently is, I cannot possibly remember all the options available. How is a mere mortal like my Dad supposed to understand and retain all this? I get the shakes every time i need to find something on Win 7. Anyone have some relief?

    Read the article

  • How to search inside files in Windows 7?

    - by Revolter
    In Windows XP we can search for files witch contains a defined keyword (inside all files types) Windows 7 can look inside files for a keywords, okay, but only for text files. (*.doc,*.txt, *.inf, ...), not (*.conf, *.dat, *.*, ...) Microsoft search filters don't contain any filter I can use for this. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • Google Custom Search Engine not giving the expected search result.

    - by iecut
    Hi, I have been trying to create a new google custom search engine, but when I try some query,the search engine it is not giving me the expected search result.On some queries it is working fine, but on other queries, it says"no result". I tried adding the URL of the website that I wanted to search for, but there are certain pages and keywords that are not coming up in the search result when I try to search for the keyword of that page. I tired adding both the main page URL and the URL of the sub page that I want to search for, but nothing is working. There are some sub pages to the main URL that are coming in the search result.

    Read the article

  • What would be a good filter to create 'magnetic deformers' from a depth map?

    - by sebf
    In my project, I am creating a system for deforming a highly detailed mesh (clothing) so that it 'fits' a convex mesh. To do this I use depth maps of the item and the 'hull' to determine at what point in world space the deviation occurs and the extent. Simply transforming all occluded vertices to the depths as defined by the 'hull' is fairly effective, and has good performance, but it suffers the problem of not preserving the features of the mesh and requires extensive culling to avoid false-positives. I would like instead to generate from the depth deviation map a set of simple 'deformers' which will 'push'* all vertices of the deformed mesh outwards (in world space). This way, all features of the mesh are preserved and there is no need to have complex heuristics to cull inappropriate vertices. I am not sure how to go about generating this deformer set however. I am imagining something like an algorithm that attempts to match a spherical surface to each patch of contiguous deviations within a certain range, but do not know where to start doing this. Can anyone suggest a suitable filter or algorithm for generating deformers? Or to put it another way 'compressing' a depth map? (*Push because its fitting to a convex 'bulgy' humanoid so transforms are likely to be 'spherical' from the POV of the surface.)

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 search does not return results from indexed folders

    - by Dilbert
    I am experiencing this issue over and over again and I just cannot seem to find the answer. It doesn't make sense, but search simply does not return results from folders that certainly have these files inside. It's weird that this technology exists for more than 5 years now (it could be added to Windows XP as an addon), and they still haven't got it right. My folder contains 10 image files with .png extensions. Two scenarios: Scenario 1: I exclude the folder using Indexing options. Search works. Scenario 2: I turn on indexing for this folder. Search does not work. Of course, Agent Ransack returns results every time. When I check Advanced options for the Indexing options inside control panel, .png files are checked in the File Types tab, using the "File Properties filter". What's the deal with this? [Edit] To clarify, this doesn't happen with all folders, but does with more than one. For the "problematic" folders, even *.* doesn't return a single result. I found some advice to clear the archive and readonly attributes for all files (doesn't make sense, but hey), but it didn't work. Indexing status in Control panel is: Indexing complete. 100,000 items indexed. Folder is included in the list. File types list contains the .png extension (although it doesn't work with any filter, not even *.*).

    Read the article

  • Java OpenGL color material darkens when depth test is disabled

    - by Jeff Storey
    I've been working with the depth buffer in OpenGL (JOGL) to ensure certain items are rendered in front of others by disabling the depth buffer (detailed in my previous question http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2516086/java-opengl-saving-depth-buffer). This works, except when I set the color of an item that is being drawn when the depth test is disabled, none of the material shininess shows up. The item is rendered as a darker version of the original color (it seems like there is no lighting effect really applied to it). Is there a reason why this would be happening? and how might I prevent this? thanks, Jeff

    Read the article

  • How to write to the OpenGL Depth Buffer

    - by Mikepote
    I'm trying to implement an old-school technique where a rendered background image AND preset depth information is used to occlude other objects in the scene. So for instance if you have a picture of a room with some wires hanging from the ceiling in the foreground, these are given a shallow depth value in the depthmap, and when rendered correctly, allows the character to walk "behind" the wires but in front of other objects in the room. So far I've tried creating a depth texture using: glTexImage2D(GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT, Image.GetWidth(), Image.GetHeight(), 0, GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, pixels); Then just binding it to a quad and rendering that over the screen, but it doesnt write the depth values from the texture. I've also tried: glDrawPixels(Image.GetWidth(), Image.GetHeight(), GL_DEPTH_COMPONENT, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, pixels); But this slows down my framerate to about 0.25 fps... I know that you can do this in a pixelshader by setting the gl_fragDepth to a value from the texture, but I wanted to know if I could achieve this with non-pixelshader enabled hardware?

    Read the article

  • Depth First Search Basics

    - by cam
    I'm trying to improve my current algorithm for the 8 Queens problem, and this is the first time I'm really dealing with algorithm design/algorithms. I want to implement a depth-first search combined with a permutation of the different Y values described here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_queens_puzzle#The_eight_queens_puzzle_as_an_exercise_in_algorithm_design I've implemented the permutation part to solve the problem, but I'm having a little trouble wrapping my mind around the depth-first search. It is described as a way of traversing a tree/graph, but does it generate the tree graph? It seems the only way that this method would be more efficient only if the depth-first search generates the tree structure to be traversed, by implementing some logic to only generate certain parts of the tree. So essentially, I would have to create an algorithm that generated a pruned tree of lexigraphic permutations. I know how to implement the pruning logic, but I'm just not sure how to tie it in with the permutation generator since I've been using next_permutation. Is there any resources that could help me with the basics of depth first searches or creating lexigraphic permutations in tree form?

    Read the article

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