Search Results

Search found 8715 results on 349 pages for 'bad sectors'.

Page 50/349 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

  • Is this a bad version of the Merge Sort algorithm?

    - by SebKom
    merge1(int low, int high, int S[], U[]) { int k = (high - low + 1)/2 for q (from low to high) U[q] = S[q] int j = low int p = low int i = low + k while (j <= low + k - 1) and (i <= high) do { if ( U[j] <= U[i] ) { S[p] := U[j] j := j+1 } else { S[p] := U[i] i := i+1 } p := p+1 } if (j <= low + k - 1) { for q from p to high do { S[q] := U[j] j := j+1 } } } merge_sort1(int low, int high, int S[], U[]) { if low < high { int k := (high - low + 1)/2 merge_sort1(low, low+k-1, S, U) merge_sort1(low+k, high, S, U) merge1(low, high, S, U) } } I am really sorry for the terrible formating, as you can tell I am not a regular visitor here. So, basically, this is on my lecture notes. I find it quite confusing in general but I understand the biggest part of it. What I don't understand is the need of the "if (j <= low + k - 1)" part. It looks like it checks if there are any elements "left" in the left part. Is that even possible when mergesorting?

    Read the article

  • Best practices about creating a generic object dictionary in C#? Is this bad?

    - by JimDaniel
    For clarity I am using C# 3.5/Asp.Net MVC 2 Here is what I have done: I wanted the ability to add/remove functionality to an object at run-time. So I simply added a generic object dictionary to my class like this: public Dictionary<int, object> Components { get; set; } Then I can add/remove any kind of .Net object into this dictionary at run-time. To insert an object I do something like this: var tag = new Tag(); myObject.Components.Add((int)Types.Components.Tag, tag); Then to retrieve I just do this: if(myObject.Components.ContainsKey((int)Types.Components.Tag)) { var tag = myObject.Components[(int)Types.Components.Tag] as Tag; if(tag != null) { //do stuff } } Somehow I feel sneaky doing this. It works okay, but I am wondering what you guys think about it as a best practice. Thanks for your input, Daniel

    Read the article

  • Why is it a bad idea to use ClientLogin for web apps in the Google API?

    - by Onema
    I just picked up the Google API today to allow some users of our site to upload videos to our own organization YouTube account. I Don't want our users to know our user name and password, but rather give them the option if they want to upload videos to youtube or not. If they choose to do it, they check on a check box and hit the submit button. I keep seeing over, and over in the Developers guide that ClientLogin, which to me looks like the best option to implement what I want to do, is not a good idea for user authentication in web applicaitons. The "AuthSub for web applications" doesn't seem to be the best mechanism for what I want to implement! Any ideas on what to do? Thank you

    Read the article

  • Why is it bad practice to use links with the javascript: "protocol"?

    - by zneak
    Hello everyone, In the 1990s, there was a fashion to put Javascript code directly into <a> href attributes, like this: <a href="javascript:alert('Hello world!')">Press me!</a> And then suddenly I stopped to see it. They were all replaced by things like: <a href="#" onclick="alert('Hello world!')">Press me!</a> For a link whose sole purpose is to trigger Javascript code, and has no real href target, why is it encouraged to use the onclick property instead of the href property?

    Read the article

  • Is locking on the requested object a bad idea?

    - by Quick Joe Smith
    Most advice on thread safety involves some variation of the following pattern: public class Thing { private static readonly object padlock = new object(); private string stuff, andNonsense; public string Stuff { get { lock (Thing.padlock) { if (this.stuff == null) this.stuff = "Threadsafe!"; } return this.stuff; } } public string AndNonsense { get { lock (Thing.padlock) { if (this.andNonsense == null) this.andNonsense = "Also threadsafe!"; } return this.andNonsense; } } // Rest of class... } In cases where the get operations are expensive and unrelated, a single locking object is unsuitable because a call to Stuff would block all calls to AndNonsense, degrading performance. And rather than create a lock object for each call, wouldn't it be better to acquire the lock on the member itself (assuming it is not something that implements SyncRoot or somesuch for that purpose? For example: public string Stuff { get { lock (this.stuff) { // Pretend that this is a very expensive operation. if (this.stuff == null) this.stuff = "Still threadsafe and good?"; } return this.stuff; } } Strangely, I have never seen this approach recommended or warned against. Am I missing something obvious?

    Read the article

  • Bad idea to have the same object, have a different side effect after method call.

    - by Nathan W
    Hi all, I'm having a bit of a gesign issue(again). Say I have this Buttonpad object: now this object is a wrapper object over one in a com object. At the moment it has a method on it called CreateInto(IComObject). Now to make a new button pad in the Com Object. You do: ButtonPad pad = new ButtonPad(); pad.Title = "Hello"; // Set some more properties. pad.CreateInto(Cominstance); The createinfo method will excute the right commands to buid the button pad in the com object. After it has been created it any calls against it are foward to the underlying object for change so: pad.Title = "New title"; will call the com object to set the title and also set the internal title variable. Basically any calls before the CreateInfo method only affect the .NET object anything after has the side effect of calling the com object also. I'm not very good at sequence diagrams but here is my attempt to explain whats going on: This doesn't feel good to me, it feels like I'm lying to the user about what the button pad does. I was going to have a object called WrappedButtonPad, which is returned from CreateInto and the user could make calls against that to make changes to the Com Object, but I feel having two objects that almost do the same thing but only differ by names might be even worse. Are these valid designs, or am I right to be worried? How else would you handle a object the can create and query a com object?

    Read the article

  • Is concatenating with an empty string to do a string conversion really that bad?

    - by polygenelubricants
    Let's say I have two char variables, and later on I want to concatenate them into a string. This is how I would do it: char c1, c2; // ... String s = "" + c1 + c2; I've seen people who say that the "" + "trick" is "ugly", etc, and that you should use String.valueOf or Character.toString instead. I prefer this construct because: I prefer using language feature instead of API call if possible In general, isn't the language usually more stable than the API? If language feature only hides API call, then even stronger reason to prefer it! More abstract! Hiding is good! I like that the c1 and c2 are visually on the same level String.valueOf(c1) + c2 suggests something is special about c1 It's shorter. Is there really a good argument why String.valueOf or Character.toString is preferrable to "" +? Trivia: in java.lang.AssertionError, the following line appears 7 times, each with a different type: this("" + detailMessage);

    Read the article

  • Is it so bad to have heaps of elements in your DOM?

    - by alex
    I am making a real estate non interactive display for their shop window. I have kicked jCarousel into doing what I want: Add panels per AJAX Towards the end of the current set, go and AJAX some new panels and insert them This works fine, but it appears calling jQuery's remove() on the prior elements cause an ugly bump. I'm not sure if calling hide() will free up any resources, as the element will still exist (and the element will be off screen anyway). I've seen this, and tried carousel.reset() from within a callback. It just clears out all the elements. This will be running on Google Chrome on Windows XP, and will solely by displaying on LCD televisions. I am wondering, if I can't find a reasonable solution to remove the extra DOM elements, will it bring my application to a crawl, or will Chrome do some clever garbage collecting? Or, how would you solve this problem? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Are indexes good or bad for a large database?

    - by gmemon
    Hello All, I read on MySQL Performance Blog that when tables are large, it is better to scan full tables, instead of using indexes. I have a table with tens of millions of rows. When conducting queries, if I use no indexes, then queries are 24 times slower than with indexes. I know lot of things may cause this (e.g., are rows stored sequentially), but can you please give me some hints what might be happening? Or how I should start examining this issue? I want to understand when use of indexes is preferred and when it's not Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to 'mix class and interfaces in the same package'?

    - by DerMike
    Hello, I just found something that I never heard of before and I do not agree with (by now). In an (upvoted and not further commented) answer I read "why to mix class and interfaces in the same package" So I wonder, if there are reasons to separate Interfaces and implementations in Java. I know that we are not obliged to have all implementations in the package of the interface, but is it (sometimes) wise to have none there? Regards Mike [;-)

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practice to declare an array mid-function...

    - by Maximus
    In C, which would be more proper... void MyFunction() { int* array; int size; //do a bunch of stuff size = 10; array = (int*)(sizeof(int)*size); //do more stuff... //no longer need array... free(array); } Or is something like this okay? void MyFunction() { int size; //do a bunch of stuff size = 10; array[size]; //do more stuff... } The malloc uses the heap instead of the stack, so I suppose if you know size is going to be very large you'd want to malloc... but if you're quite certain size will be small enough, would the second method be reasonable?

    Read the article

  • Why did I get a 400 Bad Request when getting a page with PHP Curl?

    - by user307272
    Hi, I was trying to access a page using curl. I could access it perfectly using the browser and using "static" strings as the URL, like: $url = "http://www.example.com/?q=1234" But when I tried to access the page using a variable in the URL string like: $url = "http://www.example.com/?q=$param" I got a 400 error code. I checked out on the web and found some comments here in this stackoverflow thread: Then, just for curiosity I did the following: $url = "http://www.example.com/?q=" . trim($param); and it worked! And no, $param did NOT contain any spaces. To me, it seems that it can be some encoding error, but I really can't find an explanation for it. Does anyone here in stackoverflow know what it can possibly be? Thanks in advance :)

    Read the article

  • Using low level api for datastore in google app engine ? is it bad ?

    - by Chez
    There is little documentation on how to use the low level api for datastore and quite a lot on JPA and JDO and how it translates to it. My question is: is there any advantage in coding against the JPA or JDO specs instead of accessing directly the low level api for datastore ? From an initial look, it seems simple and straight forward but I am not sure if there are good reasons why not to do it. Thanks Cx

    Read the article

  • Is it bad for SEO to have an 'article' published under 2 urls?

    - by Alichad
    Hi, On our new website we publish an article once and can tag it to appear in several sections eg. blahblah.com/insight/10-05-21/Buzzcity-releases-mobile-game-library.aspx blahblah.com/international_media/10-05-21/Buzzcity-releases-mobile-game-library.aspx Is it better for SEO to have the 2 different urls which include important keywords like ‘insight’ and ‘international media’ or is it better to have a single generic url? E.g. blahblah.com/articles/10-05-21/Buzzcity_releases_mobile_game_library.aspx I read somewhere that google doesn’t like the same content ‘duplicated’ in 2 (or 3) places - I am not a tecchie. THanks

    Read the article

  • Is the 'var' keyword bad? Or am I just old school?

    - by WaggingSiberian
    Recently I overheard junior developer ask "why do you use 'var' so much?". The mid-level developer responded "I use VAR all the time. I love it! I don't have to figure out the type." I didn't have the time or energy to get into a religious war and hey, I'm still the new guy here :-) I understand var has its place. LINQ comes to mind. But I have also always been told the use of var represents lazy programming and I should just use the correct type to begin with. If it's an int, define it as an int, not a var. When reviewing code, seeing the type makes it easier to follow. My opinion is, it's just lazy but there are exceptions. Var also reminds me of the VB/VBA variant type. It also had its place. I recall (from many years ago) its usage being less-than-desirable type and it was rather resource hungry. Am I just being stuck in my ways? Should we start using var all the time as my co-worker does?

    Read the article

  • Are multiple asserts bad in a unit test? Even if chaining?

    - by Michael Haren
    Is there anything wrong with checking so many things in this unit test?: ActualModel = ActualResult.AssertViewRendered() // check 1 .ForView("Index") // check 2 .WithViewData<List<Page>>(); // check 3 CollectionAssert.AreEqual(Expected, ActualModel); // check 4 The primary goals of this test are to verify the right view is returned (check 2) and it contains the right data (check 4). Would I gain anything by splitting this into multiple tests? I'm all about doing things right, but I'm not going to split things up if it doesn't have practical value. I'm pretty new to unit testing, so be gentle.

    Read the article

  • Is "campaign_$" a bad name for a SQL column?

    - by Summer
    PostgreSQL has allowed me to name a column "campaign_$". I like the name because it's short and to the point, and other potential names like "campaign_receipts" seem longer and less clear. BUT, I wonder if I'll eventually regret putting a $ symbol in a column name, either in PHP or in some other distant part of the architecture. Should I just stick to letters and underscores? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Is there possible in clojure to make a deadlock (or anything bad case) using agents?

    - by hsestupin
    CLojure agents is powerful tool. So actions to the agents are asynchronously sent using functions "send" and "send-off". And in theory there couldn't appear something like deadlock. Is there possible to write some clojure code (for example invoking from some action another action to another agent) using agents in which we have some concurrency problem - it could be deadlock, race condition or anything else. (guys, i'm very sorry for my english)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >