Search Results

Search found 23265 results on 931 pages for 'justin case'.

Page 5/931 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Proper Case Title Case Question

    - by Michael Quiles
    What am i doing wrong here? I want the users name to be shown in the output as propercase but I cant figure it out. string proper = this.xTripNameTextBox.Text; CultureInfo properCase = System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture; TextInfo currentInfo = properCase.TextInfo; proper = currentInfo.ToTitleCase(proper); this.xTripOutputLabel.Text = proper + Environment.NewLine + "The total gallons you would use: " + Output.ToString("0") + Environment.NewLine + "Total amount it will cost you: " + Coutput.ToString("C") + Environment.NewLine +" Your customer number is " + rnd1.Next(1, 1000).ToString();

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008: CASE vs IF-ELSE-IF vs GOTO

    - by Saharsh Shah
    I have some rules in my application and I have written the business logic of that rules in my procedure. At the time of creation of procedure I came to know that CASE statement won't work in my scenario. So I have tried two ways to perform same operations (using IF-ELSE-IF or GOTO) shown as below. Method 1 Using IF-ELSE-IF conditions: DECLARE @V_RuleId SMALLINT; IF (@V_RuleId = 1) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 2) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 3) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END /* ... ... ... ...*/ ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 19) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END ELSE IF (@V_RuleId = 20) BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END Method 2 Using GOTO statement: DECLARE @V_RuleId SMALLINT, @V_Temp VARCHAR(100); SET @V_Temp = 'GOTO RULE' + CONVERT(VARCHAR, @V_RuleId); EXECUTE sp_executesql @V_Temp; RULE1: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE2: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE3: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END /* ... ... ... ...*/ RULE19: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END RULE20: BEGIN /*My business logic*/ END Today I have 20 rules. It can be increase to any number in future. If I can able to use CASE statement then I have not any problem with performance, but I can't do that so I am worried about the performance of my procedure. Also one thing to be noticed that this procedure will execute very frequently by application. My questions are: Is there any way to use CASE statement in my procedure? If not, which method is best to use in my procedure to improve the performance of my code? Thanks in advance...

    Read the article

  • Ignore case in Python strings

    - by Paul Oyster
    What is the easiest way to compare strings in Python, ignoring case? Of course one can do (str1.lower() <= str2.lower()), etc., but this created two additional temporary strings (with the obvious alloc/g-c overheads). I guess I'm looking for an equivalent to C's stricmp(). [Some more context requested, so I'll demonstrate with a trivial example:] Suppose you want to sort a looong list of strings. You simply do theList.sort(). This is O(n * log(n)) string comparisons and no memory management (since all strings and list elements are some sort of smart pointers). You are happy. Now, you want to do the same, but ignore the case (let's simplify and say all strings are ascii, so locale issues can be ignored). You can do theList.sort(key=lambda s: s.lower()), but then you cause two new allocations per comparison, plus burden the garbage-collector with the duplicated (lowered) strings. Each such memory-management noise is orders-of-magnitude slower than simple string comparison. Now, with an in-place stricmp()-like function, you do: theList.sort(cmp=stricmp) and it is as fast and as memory-friendly as theList.sort(). You are happy again. The problem is any Python-based case-insensitive comparison involves implicit string duplications, so I was expecting to find a C-based comparisons (maybe in module string). Could not find anything like that, hence the question here. (Hope this clarifies the question).

    Read the article

  • Delphi Performance: Case Versus If

    - by Andreas Rejbrand
    I guess there might be some overlapping with previous SO questions, but I could not find a Delphi-specific question on this topic. Suppose that you want to check if an unsigned 32-bit integer variable "MyAction" is equal to any of the constants ACTION1, ACTION2, ... ACTIONn, where n is - say 1000. I guess that, besides being more elegant, case MyAction of ACTION1: {code}; ACTION2: {code}; ... ACTIONn: {code}; end; if much faster than if MyAction = ACTION1 then // code else if MyAction = ACTION2 then // code ... else if MyAction = ACTIONn then // code; I guess that the if variant takes time O(n) to complete (i.e. to find the right action) if the right action ACTIONi has a high value of i, whereas the case variant takes a lot less time (O(1)?). Am I correct that switch is much faster? Am I correct that the time required to find the right action in the switch case actually is independent of n? I.e. is it true that it does not really take any longer to check a million cases than to check 10 cases? How, exactly, does this work?

    Read the article

  • How to make this .htaccess rule case insensitive?

    - by alex
    This is a rule in my .htaccess # those CSV files are under the DOCROOT ... so let's hide 'em <FilesMatch "\.CSV$"> Order Allow,Deny Deny from all </FilesMatch> I've noticed however that if there is a file with a lowercase or mixed case extension of CSV, it will be ignored by the rule and displayed. How do I make this case insensitive? I hope it doesn't come down to "\.(?:CSV|csv)$" (which I'm not sure would even work, and doesn't cover all bases) Note: The files are under the docroot, and are uploaded automatically there by a 3rd party service, so I'd prefer to implement a rule my end instead of bothering them. Had I set this site up though, I'd go for above the docroot. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Summing the results of Case queries in SQL

    - by David Stelfox
    I think this is a relatively straightforward question but I have spent the afternoon looking for an answer and cannot yet find it. So... I have a view with a country column and a number column. I want to make any number less than 10 'other' and then sum the 'other's into one value. For example, AR 10 AT 7 AU 11 BB 2 BE 23 BY 1 CL 2 I used CASE as follows: select country = case when number < 10 then 'Other' else country end, number from ... This replaces the countries values with less than 10 in the number column to other but I can't work out how to sum them. I want to end up with a table/view which looks like this: AR 10 AU 11 BE 23 Other 12 Any help is greatly appreciated. Cheers, David

    Read the article

  • How to properly match the following message id format in a case statement

    - by hsatterwhite
    I'm trying to get this regex pattern working in a case statement to match a particular type of ID, which could be passed to the script. I need to match the exact number of alphanumeric characters with the dashes to differentiate this message id from anything else, which may be passed to this bash script. An example of the message id format: c7c3e910-c9d2-71e1-0999-0aec446b0000 #!/bin/bash until [ -z "$1" ] do case "$1" in "") echo "No value passed" ;; [a-z0-9]\{8\}-[a-z0-9]\{4\}-[a-z0-9]\{4\}-[a-z0-9]\{4\}-[a-z0-9]\{12\}) echo "Found message ID: $1" ;; *) echo "Server $1" ;; esac shift done

    Read the article

  • Does the order of case in Switch statement can vary the performance?

    - by Bipul
    Let say I have a switch statement as below Switch(alphabet){ case "f": //do something break; case "c": //do something break; case "a": //do something break; case "e": //do something break; } Now suppose I know that the frequency of having Alphabet e is highest followed by a, c and f respectively. So, I just restructured the case statement order and made them as follows. Switch(alphabet){ case "e": //do something break; case "a": //do something break; case "c": //do something break; case "f": //do something break; } Will the second Switch statement better perform(means faster) than the first switch statement? If yes and if in my program I need to call this switch statement say many times, will that be a substantial improvement? Or if not in any how can I use my frequency knowledge to improve the performance? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Scala parser combinator runs out of memory

    - by user3217013
    I wrote the following parser in Scala using the parser combinators: import scala.util.parsing.combinator._ import scala.collection.Map import scala.io.StdIn object Keywords { val Define = "define" val True = "true" val False = "false" val If = "if" val Then = "then" val Else = "else" val Return = "return" val Pass = "pass" val Conj = ";" val OpenParen = "(" val CloseParen = ")" val OpenBrack = "{" val CloseBrack = "}" val Comma = "," val Plus = "+" val Minus = "-" val Times = "*" val Divide = "/" val Pow = "**" val And = "&&" val Or = "||" val Xor = "^^" val Not = "!" val Equals = "==" val NotEquals = "!=" val Assignment = "=" } //--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sealed abstract class Op case object Plus extends Op case object Minus extends Op case object Times extends Op case object Divide extends Op case object Pow extends Op case object And extends Op case object Or extends Op case object Xor extends Op case object Not extends Op case object Equals extends Op case object NotEquals extends Op case object Assignment extends Op //--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sealed abstract class Term case object TrueTerm extends Term case object FalseTerm extends Term case class FloatTerm(value : Float) extends Term case class StringTerm(value : String) extends Term case class Identifier(name : String) extends Term //--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sealed abstract class Expression case class TermExp(term : Term) extends Expression case class UnaryOp(op : Op, exp : Expression) extends Expression case class BinaryOp(op : Op, left : Expression, right : Expression) extends Expression case class FuncApp(funcName : Term, args : List[Expression]) extends Expression //--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sealed abstract class Statement case class ExpressionStatement(exp : Expression) extends Statement case class Pass() extends Statement case class Return(value : Expression) extends Statement case class AssignmentVar(variable : Term, exp : Expression) extends Statement case class IfThenElse(testBody : Expression, thenBody : Statement, elseBody : Statement) extends Statement case class Conjunction(left : Statement, right : Statement) extends Statement case class AssignmentFunc(functionName : Term, args : List[Term], body : Statement) extends Statement //--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- class myParser extends JavaTokenParsers { val keywordMap : Map[String, Op] = Map( Keywords.Plus -> Plus, Keywords.Minus -> Minus, Keywords.Times -> Times, Keywords.Divide -> Divide, Keywords.Pow -> Pow, Keywords.And -> And, Keywords.Or -> Or, Keywords.Xor -> Xor, Keywords.Not -> Not, Keywords.Equals -> Equals, Keywords.NotEquals -> NotEquals, Keywords.Assignment -> Assignment ) def floatTerm : Parser[Term] = decimalNumber ^^ { case x => FloatTerm( x.toFloat ) } def stringTerm : Parser[Term] = stringLiteral ^^ { case str => StringTerm(str) } def identifier : Parser[Term] = ident ^^ { case value => Identifier(value) } def boolTerm : Parser[Term] = (Keywords.True | Keywords.False) ^^ { case Keywords.True => TrueTerm case Keywords.False => FalseTerm } def simpleTerm : Parser[Expression] = (boolTerm | floatTerm | stringTerm) ^^ { case term => TermExp(term) } def argument = expression def arguments_aux : Parser[List[Expression]] = (argument <~ Keywords.Comma) ~ arguments ^^ { case arg ~ argList => arg :: argList } def arguments = arguments_aux | { argument ^^ { case arg => List(arg) } } def funcAppArgs : Parser[List[Expression]] = funcEmptyArgs | ( Keywords.OpenParen ~> arguments <~ Keywords.CloseParen ^^ { case args => args.foldRight(List[Expression]()) ( (a,b) => a :: b ) } ) def funcApp = identifier ~ funcAppArgs ^^ { case funcName ~ argList => FuncApp(funcName, argList) } def variableTerm : Parser[Expression] = identifier ^^ { case name => TermExp(name) } def atomic_expression = simpleTerm | funcApp | variableTerm def paren_expression : Parser[Expression] = Keywords.OpenParen ~> expression <~ Keywords.CloseParen def unary_operation : Parser[String] = Keywords.Not def unary_expression : Parser[Expression] = operation(0) ~ expression(0) ^^ { case op ~ exp => UnaryOp(keywordMap(op), exp) } def operation(precedence : Int) : Parser[String] = precedence match { case 0 => Keywords.Not case 1 => Keywords.Pow case 2 => Keywords.Times | Keywords.Divide | Keywords.And case 3 => Keywords.Plus | Keywords.Minus | Keywords.Or | Keywords.Xor case 4 => Keywords.Equals | Keywords.NotEquals case _ => throw new Exception("No operations with this precedence.") } def binary_expression(precedence : Int) : Parser[Expression] = precedence match { case 0 => throw new Exception("No operation with zero precedence.") case n => (expression (n-1)) ~ operation(n) ~ (expression (n)) ^^ { case left ~ op ~ right => BinaryOp(keywordMap(op), left, right) } } def expression(precedence : Int) : Parser[Expression] = precedence match { case 0 => unary_expression | paren_expression | atomic_expression case n => binary_expression(n) | expression(n-1) } def expression : Parser[Expression] = expression(4) def expressionStmt : Parser[Statement] = expression ^^ { case exp => ExpressionStatement(exp) } def assignment : Parser[Statement] = (identifier <~ Keywords.Assignment) ~ expression ^^ { case varName ~ exp => AssignmentVar(varName, exp) } def ifthen : Parser[Statement] = ((Keywords.If ~ Keywords.OpenParen) ~> expression <~ Keywords.CloseParen) ~ ((Keywords.Then ~ Keywords.OpenBrack) ~> statements <~ Keywords.CloseBrack) ^^ { case ifBody ~ thenBody => IfThenElse(ifBody, thenBody, Pass()) } def ifthenelse : Parser[Statement] = ((Keywords.If ~ Keywords.OpenParen) ~> expression <~ Keywords.CloseParen) ~ ((Keywords.Then ~ Keywords.OpenBrack) ~> statements <~ Keywords.CloseBrack) ~ ((Keywords.Else ~ Keywords.OpenBrack) ~> statements <~ Keywords.CloseBrack) ^^ { case ifBody ~ thenBody ~ elseBody => IfThenElse(ifBody, thenBody, elseBody) } def pass : Parser[Statement] = Keywords.Pass ^^^ { Pass() } def returnStmt : Parser[Statement] = Keywords.Return ~> expression ^^ { case exp => Return(exp) } def statement : Parser[Statement] = ((pass | returnStmt | assignment | expressionStmt) <~ Keywords.Conj) | ifthenelse | ifthen def statements_aux : Parser[Statement] = statement ~ statements ^^ { case st ~ sts => Conjunction(st, sts) } def statements : Parser[Statement] = statements_aux | statement def funcDefBody : Parser[Statement] = Keywords.OpenBrack ~> statements <~ Keywords.CloseBrack def funcEmptyArgs = Keywords.OpenParen ~ Keywords.CloseParen ^^^ { List() } def funcDefArgs : Parser[List[Term]] = funcEmptyArgs | Keywords.OpenParen ~> repsep(identifier, Keywords.Comma) <~ Keywords.CloseParen ^^ { case args => args.foldRight(List[Term]()) ( (a,b) => a :: b ) } def funcDef : Parser[Statement] = (Keywords.Define ~> identifier) ~ funcDefArgs ~ funcDefBody ^^ { case funcName ~ funcArgs ~ body => AssignmentFunc(funcName, funcArgs, body) } def funcDefAndStatement : Parser[Statement] = funcDef | statement def funcDefAndStatements_aux : Parser[Statement] = funcDefAndStatement ~ funcDefAndStatements ^^ { case stmt ~ stmts => Conjunction(stmt, stmts) } def funcDefAndStatements : Parser[Statement] = funcDefAndStatements_aux | funcDefAndStatement def parseProgram : Parser[Statement] = funcDefAndStatements def eval(input : String) = { parseAll(parseProgram, input) match { case Success(result, _) => result case Failure(m, _) => println(m) case _ => println("") } } } object Parser { def main(args : Array[String]) { val x : myParser = new myParser() println(args(0)) val lines = scala.io.Source.fromFile(args(0)).mkString println(x.eval(lines)) } } The problem is, when I run the parser on the following example it works fine: define foo(a) { if (!h(IM) && a) then { return 0; } if (a() && !h()) then { return 0; } } But when I add threes characters in the first if statement, it runs out of memory. This is absolutely blowing my mind. Can anyone help? (I suspect it has to do with repsep, but I am not sure.) define foo(a) { if (!h(IM) && a(1)) then { return 0; } if (a() && !h()) then { return 0; } } EDIT: Any constructive comments about my Scala style is also appreciated.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server: Writing CASE expressions properly when NULLs are involved

    - by Mladen Prajdic
    We’ve all written a CASE expression (yes, it’s an expression and not a statement) or two every now and then. But did you know there are actually 2 formats you can write the CASE expression in? This actually bit me when I was trying to add some new functionality to an old stored procedure. In some rare cases the stored procedure just didn’t work correctly. After a quick look it turned out to be a CASE expression problem when dealing with NULLS. In the first format we make simple “equals to” comparisons to a value: SELECT CASE <value> WHEN <equals this value> THEN <return this> WHEN <equals this value> THEN <return this> -- ... more WHEN's here ELSE <return this> END Second format is much more flexible since it allows for complex conditions. USE THIS ONE! SELECT CASE WHEN <value> <compared to> <value> THEN <return this> WHEN <value> <compared to> <value> THEN <return this> -- ... more WHEN's here ELSE <return this> END Now that we know both formats and you know which to use (the second one if that hasn’t been clear enough) here’s an example how the first format WILL make your evaluation logic WRONG. Run the following code for different values of @i. Just comment out any 2 out of 3 “SELECT @i =” statements. DECLARE @i INTSELECT  @i = -1 -- first resultSELECT  @i = 55 -- second resultSELECT  @i = NULL -- third resultSELECT @i AS OriginalValue, -- first CASE format. DON'T USE THIS! CASE @i WHEN -1 THEN '-1' WHEN NULL THEN 'We have a NULL!' ELSE 'We landed in ELSE' END AS DontUseThisCaseFormatValue, -- second CASE format. USE THIS! CASE WHEN @i = -1 THEN '-1' WHEN @i IS NULL THEN 'We have a NULL!' ELSE 'We landed in ELSE' END AS UseThisCaseFormatValue When the value of @i is –1 everything works as expected, since both formats go into the –1 WHEN branch. When the value of @i is 55 everything again works as expected, since both formats go into the ELSE branch. When the value of @i is NULL the problems become evident. The first format doesn’t go into the WHEN NULL branch because it makes an equality comparison between two NULLs. Because a NULL is an unknown value: NULL = NULL is false. That is why the first format goes into the ELSE Branch but the second format correctly handles the proper IS NULL comparison.   Please use the second more explicit format. Your future self will be very grateful to you when he doesn’t have to discover these kinds of bugs.

    Read the article

  • IL and case-sensitivity

    - by Ali .NET
    Quoted from A Brief Introduction To IL code, CLR, CTS, CLS and JIT In .NET CLS stands for Common Language Specifications. It is a subset of CTS. CLS is a set of rules or guidelines which if followed ensures that code written in one .NET language can be used by another .NET language. For example one rule is that we cannot have member functions with same name with case difference only i.e we should not have add() and Add(). This may work in C# because it is case-sensitive but if try to use that C# code in VB.NET, it is not possible because VB.NET is not case-sensitive. Based on above text I want to confirm two points here: Does the case-sensitivity of IL is a condition for member functions only, and not for member properties? Is it true that C# wouldn't be inter-operable with VB.NET if it didn't take care of the case sensitivity?

    Read the article

  • VB Myth - Case Insensitivity is Awesome!

    - by Damon
    I was reading Andy Brown's article 10 Reasons Why Visual Basic is Better than C# and the first claim is that VB is superior because of case insensitivity.  I think the reasons he outlines are basically as follows: Your fingers get tired finding the shift key (e.g. typing PascalCase and camelCase members) You are much more likely to make mistakes while typing names When you accidentally leave caps lock on, it really matters These three arguments culminate in the conclusion: "It doesn't matter if you disagree with everything else in this article: case-sensitivity alone is sufficient reason to ditch C#!" Righto.  I've been using Visual Basic since version 5.0, I wrote a book about ASP.NET in Visual Basic, so I want everyone to know I'm definitely not a VB.NET hater.  I had to converted to C# because it was the language of preference at the places I've worked, so I'm used to both languages.  I love me some case sensitivity.  So first, let's debunk the claims. First, your fingers do not get tired of finding the shift key unless you are writing code in notepad and compiling everything on the command line.  Visual Studio pretty much takes away the need to use the shift key at all. For the most part, any programmer worth a damn doesn't have to type more than about 3-5 characters of any variable or method name before IntelliSense kicks in to help.  VB or C#, if you are not using the tab key for autocomplete then you are typing too much anyway, regardless of whether the shift key is involved or not.  Also, you've got to be a pretty hard-core candy ass if you're complaining at the end of the day that your little fingers are hurting from hitting the shift key. Second, I cannot logically refute the fact that if there are more stringent rules about case sensitivity it will lead to more mistakes.  As such, know that you will be more prone to mistakes in C#.  However, lets talk about the magnitude of the problem.  If you are using IntelliSense then you have auto-correction built in so you probably won't have much of a problem in the first place.  If you manage to bypass IntelliSense and type something wrong you normally are immediately presented with a red-squiggly to let you know something is amiss.  Normally, a person would look at the problem, figure out what the heck went wrong, and then avoid that problem again in the future.  Granted, I have met people who seem to lack this capability, but their problem is deeper than a decision between VB.NET and C#.  So let's make sure that we're all on the same page about this problem.  If you have two teams of developers, one that uses VB.NET and one that uses C#, do not expect to see the VB.NET team drinking beer at the end of the project in festive revelry while the C# team is crying over what the hell to do because their code is riddled with case-sensitivity problems that nobody can resolve. Lastly, if you leave your caps lock key on, turn it off.  Really, what kind of ass-hat would write an entire VB.NET application ENTIRELY IN CAPS?  I happen to be a fan of case sensitivity because it encourages precision and uniformity.  The last thing I need is a code base that looks like it was ransacked by LeEt HacKors wHo Can uSe wHateVer cASe tHey wanT.  I mean really, if you saw someone write this: PuBLIc Sub MyMethod . End Sub And upon asking them why BL was upper case, they responded "Oh, I accidentally hit the shift key there.  Fortunately for me VB.NET is a case insensitive language so I saved a couple of keystrokes by leaving it in there."  Or if you saw: PUBLIC SUB ANOTHERMETHOD . END SUB And the response to why it was uppercased was "Yeah, I accidentally had caps locks on, fortunately for me VB.NET doesn't care.  Really dodged a bullet there, glad I wasn't using C#."  Would you not think that a bit ridiculous?  If you want to convince C# developers that C# sucks, go for it.  But the case insensitivity argument is crap.

    Read the article

  • How to do case-insensitive order in Rails with postgresql

    - by brad
    I am in the process of switching my development environment from sqlite3 to postgresql 8.4 and have one last hurdle. In my original I had the following line in a helper method; result = Users.find(:all, :order => "name collate NOCASE") which provided a very nice case-insensitive search. I can't replicate this for postgresql. Should be easy - any ideas? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Sort a list of tuples without case sensitivity

    - by dound
    How can I efficiently and easily sort a list of tuples without being sensitive to case? For example this: [('a', 'c'), ('A', 'b'), ('a', 'a'), ('a', 5)] Should look like this once sorted: [('a', 5), ('a', 'a'), ('A', 'b'), ('a', 'c')] The regular lexicographic sort will put 'A' before 'a' and yield this: [('A', 'b'), ('a', 5), ('a', 'a'), ('a', 'c')]

    Read the article

  • Simple way to create possible case

    - by bugbug
    I have lists of data such as a = [1,2,3,4] b = ["a","b","c","d","e"] c = ["001","002","003"] And I want to create new another list that was mixed from all possible case of a,b,c like this d = ["1a001","1a002","1a003",...,"4e003"] Is there any module or method to generate d without write many for loop?

    Read the article

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