Search Results

Search found 658 results on 27 pages for 'oo'.

Page 6/27 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • How to convert from K&R C to ANSI C?

    - by Vadakkumpadath
    I am trying to execute following code which is the 1988 entry of Obfuscated C Code Contest. #define _ -F<00||--F-OO--; int F=00,OO=00;main(){F_OO();printf("%1.3f\n",4.*-F/OO/OO);}F_OO() { _-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_ } From entry description, this code is calculating pi by looking at its own area. I successfully compiled it without changing the code. But when I executed, it is giving me a value 0.25, what I am expecting is 3.14. Code description says it is in K&R C and it doesn't work correctly in ANSI C without some change. I think I have to do those modification to execute it properly. I don't have any previous experience with K&R C. So can someone help me to change above code to ANSI C or point to the problems if any. I am using Microsoft Visual Studio 2008 to execute this.

    Read the article

  • (C++) If statement not effective

    - by Galileo
    void spriteput(int x,int y, int stype) { char sprite1[5]="OOOO"; char sprite2[5]="OOOO"; char sprite3[5]="OOOO"; char sprite4[5]="OOOO"; if (stype == 1) { char sprite1[5] = " OO "; char sprite2[5] = "OOOO"; char sprite3[5] = "OOOO"; char sprite4[5] = " OO "; mvprintw(2,y,"%s \n",sprite1); } mvprintw(x+1,y,"%s \n",sprite2); mvprintw(x+2,y,"%s \n",sprite3); mvprintw(x+3,y,"%s \n",sprite4); } If I'm correct that block of code should print out on a NCURSES screen OO OOOO OOOO OO Instead however, it prints out the default text (the first char statements). Can anyone tell me why this is? The "printw" statement inside the If-block prints out the proper text, so it's being assigned correctly. Thank you in advance.

    Read the article

  • Will my self-taught code be fine, or should I take it to the professional level?

    - by G1i1ch
    Lately I've been getting professional work, hanging out with other programmers, and making friends in the industry. The only thing is I'm 100% self-taught. It's caused my style to extremely deviate from the style of those that are properly trained. It's the techniques and organization of my code that's different. It's a mixture of several things I do. I tend to blend several programming paradigms together. Like Functional and OO. I lean to the Functional side more than OO, but I see the use of OO when something would make more sense as an abstract entity. Like a game object. Next I also go the simple route when doing something. When in contrast, it seems like sometimes the code I see from professional programmers is complicated for the sake of it! I use lots of closures. And lastly, I'm not the best commenter. I find it easier just to read through my code than reading the comment. And most cases I just end up reading the code even if there are comments. Plus I've been told that, because of how simply I write my code, it's very easy to read it. I hear professionally trained programmers go on and on about things like unit tests. Something I've never used before so I haven't even the faintest idea of what they are or how they work. Lots and lots of underscores "_", which aren't really my taste. Most of the techniques I use are straight from me, or a few books I've read. Don't know anything about MVC, I've heard a lot about it though with things like backbone.js. I think it's a way to organize an application. It just confuses me though because by now I've made my own organizational structures. It's a bit of a pain. I can't use template applications at all when learning something new like with Ubuntu's Quickly. I have trouble understanding code that I can tell is from someone trained. Complete OO programming really leaves a bad taste in my mouth, yet that seems to be what EVERYONE else is strictly using. It's left me not that confident in the look of my code, or wondering whether I'll cause sparks when joining a company or maybe contributing to open source projects. In fact I'm rather scared of the fact that people will eventually be checking out my code. Is this just something normal any programmer goes through or should I really look to change up my techniques?

    Read the article

  • What is the actual problem with a prototype based design?

    - by WindScar
    I feel like anything that can be developed using OO/functional languages can be generally made 'better' using a prototype based language, because they appaer to have the best of them all: high order functions, flexibility to simulate any OO structure, productivity (low verbosity) and scalability because of concurrency. But it seems like they are avoided for the creation of executable applications and of bigger projects in general. Why that?

    Read the article

  • Should i continue my self-taught coding practice or learn how to do coding professionally?

    - by G1i1ch
    Lately I've been getting professional work, hanging out with other programmers, and making friends in the industry. The only thing is I'm 100% self-taught. It's caused my style to extremely deviate from the style of those that are properly trained. It's the techniques and organization of my code that's different. It's a mixture of several things I do. I tend to blend several programming paradigms together. Like Functional and OO. I lean to the Functional side more than OO, but I see the use of OO when something would make more sense as an abstract entity. Like a game object. Next I also go the simple route when doing something. When in contrast, it seems like sometimes the code I see from professional programmers is complicated for the sake of it! I use lots of closures. And lastly, I'm not the best commenter. I find it easier just to read through my code than reading the comment. And most cases I just end up reading the code even if there are comments. Plus I've been told that, because of how simply I write my code, it's very easy to read it. I hear professionally trained programmers go on and on about things like unit tests. Something I've never used before so I haven't even the faintest idea of what they are or how they work. Lots and lots of underscores "_", which aren't really my taste. Most of the techniques I use are straight from me, or a few books I've read. Don't know anything about MVC, I've heard a lot about it though with things like backbone.js. I think it's a way to organize an application. It just confuses me though because by now I've made my own organizational structures. It's a bit of a pain. I can't use template applications at all when learning something new like with Ubuntu's Quickly. I have trouble understanding code that I can tell is from someone trained. Complete OO programming really leaves a bad taste in my mouth, yet that seems to be what EVERYONE else is strictly using. It's left me not that confident in the look of my code, or wondering whether I'll cause sparks when joining a company or maybe contributing to open source projects. In fact I'm rather scared of the fact that people will eventually be checking out my code. Is this just something normal any programmer goes through or should I really look to change up my techniques?

    Read the article

  • Root filesystem check fails after power failure during installation

    - by Oo Nwoye
    During the "install" phase of the upgrade there was a power failure. After when starting up again the following errors are reported: init: udevtrigger main process (420) terminated with status 1 init: udevtrigger post-stop process (428) terminated with status 1 init: udevmonitor main process (419) killed by TERM signal The disk drive for / is not ready yet or not present Continue to wait; or press S to skip mounting or M for manual recovery Pressing M gives me the following message: Root filesystem check failed. A maintenance shell will now be started. CONTROL-D will terminate this shell and reboot the system.

    Read the article

  • When are Getters and Setters Justified

    - by Winston Ewert
    Getters and setters are often criticized as being not proper OO. On the other hand most OO code I've seen has extensive getters and setters. When are getters and setters justified? Do you try to avoid using them? Are they overused in general? If your favorite language has properties (mine does) then such things are also considered getters and setters for this question. They are same thing from an OO methodology perspective. They just have nicer syntax. Sources for Getter/Setter Criticism (some taken from comments to give them better visibility): http://www.javaworld.com/javaworld/jw-09-2003/jw-0905-toolbox.html http://typicalprogrammer.com/?p=23 http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AccessorsAreEvil http://www.darronschall.com/weblog/2005/03/no-brain-getter-and-setters.cfm http://www.adam-bien.com/roller/abien/entry/encapsulation_violation_with_getters_and To state the criticism simply: Getters and Setters allow you to manipulate the internal state of objects from outside of the object. This violates encapsulation. Only the object itself should care about its internal state. And an example Procedural version of code. struct Fridge { int cheese; } void go_shopping(Fridge fridge) { fridge.cheese += 5; } Mutator version of code: class Fridge { int cheese; void set_cheese(int _cheese) { cheese = _cheese; } int get_cheese() { return cheese; } } void go_shopping(Fridge fridge) { fridge.set_cheese(fridge.get_cheese() + 5); } The getters and setters made the code much more complicated without affording proper encapsulation. Because the internal state is accessible to other objects we don't gain a whole lot by adding these getters and setters. The question has been previously discussed on Stack Overflow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/565095/java-are-getters-and-setters-evil http://stackoverflow.com/questions/996179

    Read the article

  • Object behaviour or separate class?

    - by Andrew Stephens
    When it comes to OO database access you see two common approaches - the first is to provide a class (say "Customer") with methods such as Retrieve(), Update(), Delete(), etc. The other is to keep the Customer class fairly lightweight (essentially just properties) and perform the database access elsewhere, e.g. using a repository. This choice of approaches doesn't just apply to database access, it can crop up in many different OOD scenarios. So I was wondering if one way is preferable over the other (although I suspect the answer will be "it depends")! Another dev on our team argues that to be truly OO the class should be "self-contained", i.e. providing all the methods necessary to manipulate and interact with that object. I personally prefer the repository approach - I don't like bloating the Customer class with all that functionality, and I feel it results in cleaner code having it elsewhere, but I can't help thinking I'm seriously violating core OO concepts! And what about memory implications? If I retrieve thousands of Customer objects I'm assuming those with the data access methods will take up a lot more memory than the property-only objects?

    Read the article

  • Designs for outputting to a spreadsheet

    - by Austin Moore
    I'm working on a project where we are tasked to gather and output various data to a spreadsheet. We are having tons of problems with the file that holds the code to write the spreadsheet. The cell that the data belongs to is hardcoded, so anytime you need to add anything to the middle of the spreadsheet, you have to increment the location for all the fields after that in the code. There are random blank rows, to add padding between sections, and subsections within the sections, so there's no real pattern that we can replicate. Essentially, anytime we have to add or change anything to the spreadsheet it requires a many long and tedious hours. The code is all in this one large file, hacked together overtime in Perl. I've come up with a few OO solutions, but I'm not too familiar with OO programming in Perl and all my attempts at it haven't been great, so I've shied away from it so far. I've suggested we handle this section of the program with a more OO friendly language, but we can't apparently. I've also suggested that we scrap the entire spreadsheet idea, and just move to a webpage, but we can't do that either. We've been working on this project for a few months, and every time we have to change that file, we all dread it. I'm thinking it's time to start some refactoring. However, I don't even know what could make this file easier to work with. The way the output is formatted makes it so that it has to be somewhat hardcoded. I'm wondering if anyone has insight on any design patterns or techniques they have used to tackle a similar problem. I'm open to any ideas. Perl specific answers are welcome, but I am also interested in language-agnostic solutions.

    Read the article

  • My Laptop Battery Does Not Charge

    - by Oo Nwoye
    I am using a HP Pavilion and Ubuntu 11.10. I have been using Ubuntu for about a year. Recently (in Nov or there about), I noticed my battery never charges fully no matter how long it has been plugged in. I thought it was a problem with the power pack. However, after changing it, the problem is still persisting. I upgraded to 11.10 form 11.04 at about the same time so I do not know if this is a software or hardware issue. How do I solve this? This problem has been written about in various forms Laptop battery not charging after update?. Please help me or find someone that can.

    Read the article

  • How to maintain a demo version of an application?

    - by O.O
    I need to be able to demo our production application to prospective clients. The way I have it setup today is simple. The demo application is an exact duplicate of the production system, except that the data in the database is obfuscated to protect our current clients' data. This works great because it doesn't require any application changes. Boss dropped a potential BOMBSHELL today and said that the demo system needs to contain a special link and that ONLY shows up on demo. He went on to explain that in the future there may be much bigger differences between the demo and production apps (e.g. an entire area of functionality). What do I do now? Some things I have thought about doing: Maintain a different branch in subversion specific to the demo system Create an installation package that has the changes for demo, then revert and build a production installation package Modularize the application (no idea how) Say: "Screw you! I will not do it!" (LOL) Use some sort of conditional logic in the app to determine if it is a demo or a production app. E.g. (if the URL contains 'demo' then show else hide). If you haven't guessed by now, this is a web application Anyways, I have no experience in this scenario as to which one is better or if none of these are any good. Anyone have an answer, strategy, something!?

    Read the article

  • Significant amount of the time, I can't think of a reason to have an object instead of a static class. Do objects have more benefits than I think?

    - by Prog
    I understand the concept of an object, and as a Java programmer I feel the OO paradigm comes rather naturally to me in practice. However recently I found myself thinking: Wait a second, what are actually the practical benefits of using an object over using a static class (with proper encapsulation and OO practices)? I could think of two benefits of using an object (both significant and powerful): Polymorphism: allows you to swap functionality dynamically and flexibly during runtime. Also allows to add new functionality 'parts' and alternatives to the system easily. For example if there's a Car class designed to work with Engine objects, and you want to add a new Engine to the system that the Car can use, you can create a new Engine subclass and simply pass an object of this class into the Car object, without having to change anything about Car. And you can decide to do so during runtime. Being able to 'pass functionality around': you can pass an object around the system dynamically. But are there any more advantages to objects over static classes? Often when I add new 'parts' to a system, I do so by creating a new class and instantiating objects from it. But recently when I stopped and thought about it, I realized that a static class would do just the same as an object, in a lot of the places where I normally use an object. For example, I'm working on adding a save/load-file mechanism to my app. With an object, the calling line of code will look like this: Thing thing = fileLoader.load(file); With a static class, it would look like this: Thing thing = FileLoader.load(file); What's the difference? Fairly often I just can't think of a reason to instantiate an object when a plain-old static-class would act just the same. But in OO systems, static classes are fairly rare. So I must be missing something. Are there any more advantages to objects other from the two that I listed? Please explain.

    Read the article

  • AntFarm anti-pattern -- strategies to avoid, antidotes to help heal from

    - by alchemical
    I'm working on a 10 page web site with a database back-end. There are 500+ objects in use, trying to implement the MVP pattern in ASP.Net. I'm tracing the code-execution from a single-page, my finger has been on F-11 in Visual Studio for about 40 minutes, there seems to be no end, possibly 1000+ method calls for one web page! If it was just 50 objects that would be one thing, however, code execution snakes through all these objects just like millions of ants frantically woring in their giant dirt mound house, riddled with object tunnels. Hence, a new anti-pattern is born : AntFarm. AntFarm is also known as "OO-Madnes", "OO-Fever", OO-ADD, or simply design-pattern junkie. This is not the first time I've seen this, nor my associates at other companies. It seems that this style is being actively propogated, or in any case is a misunderstanding of the numerous OO/DP gospels going around... I'd like to introduce an anti-pattern to the anti-pattern: GST or "Get Stuff Done" AKA "Get Sh** done" AKA GRD (GetRDone). This pattern focused on just what it says, getting stuff done, in a simple way. I may try to outline it more in a later post, or please share your ideas on this antidote pattern. Anyway, I'm in the midst of a great example of AntFarm anti-pattern as I write (as a bonus, there is no documentation or comments). Please share you thoughts on how this anti-pattern has become so prevelant, how we can avoid it, and how can one undo or deal with this pattern in a live system one must work with!

    Read the article

  • What is the most obfuscated and clever code you've seen? [closed]

    - by ThibThib
    I am aware about the The International Obfuscated C Code Contest, but I am looking for obfuscated AND clever codes (specially short ones) Here is two examples (the first one is a classical one, I think) #define _ F-->00 || F-OO--; long F=00,OO=00; main(){F_OO();printf("%1.3f\n", 4.*-F/OO/OO);}F_OO() { _-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_ _-_-_-_ } and #include <unistd.h> float o=0.075,h=1.5,T,r,O,l,I;int _,L=80,s=3200;main(){for(;s%L|| (h-=o,T= -2),s;4 -(r=O*O)<(l=I*I)|++ _==L&&write(1,(--s%L?_<L?--_ %6:6:7)+"World! \n",1)&&(O=I=l=_=r=0,T+=o /2))O=I*2*O+h,I=l+T-r;} I let you compile and run them so as to understand what they are producing. Of course, I am not looking for only obfuscated code, because I guess that every code could be transformed in a way that it is not readable at all I am more looking for small codes that you can eventually understand, with some clever tricks. I will show them to my students as example of clever things that they should not do (it's always better to show clever examples rather than stupid ones...) Thanks

    Read the article

  • Weighted random selection using Walker's Alias Method (c# implementation)

    - by Chuck Norris
    I was looking for this algorithm (algorithm which will randomly select from a list of elements where each element has different probability of being picked (weight) ) and found only python and c implementations, after I did a C# one, a bit different (but I think simpler) I thought I should share it, and ask your opinion ? this is it: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; namespace ChuckNorris { class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var oo = new Dictionary<string, int> { {"A",7}, {"B",1}, {"C",9}, {"D",8}, {"E",11}, }; var rnd = new Random(); var pick = rnd.Next(oo.Values.Sum()); var sum = 0; var res = ""; foreach (var o in oo) { sum += o.Value; if(sum >= pick) { res = o.Key; break; } } Console.WriteLine("result is "+ res); } } } if anyone can remake it in f# please post your code

    Read the article

  • how to integrate Zend Framework MVC with existing site

    - by Joel
    Hi guys, So I'm slowly tackling OO and Zend Framework and their MVC process in particular. I have an existing website and web-based calendar application that was designed by me, but coded by a different person and done procedurally. I understand that it will be very difficult for my application to ever be completely OO without a full re-write, and I'm fine with that. I have a lot of updates and modifications I want to do in the future, so I'm wanting to start replacing some of the basic components (login, authentication. etc) now, and continue to learn as I go. Again, I'm really a newbie at programming and OO. What I'm wondering is if I'm wanting to incorporate the Framework, then would I just first drop my whole site into the /public folder of the Framework and then start pulling functionality out from there?

    Read the article

  • So what *did* Alan Kay really mean by the term "object-oriented"?

    - by Charlie Flowers
    Reportedly, Alan Kay is the inventor of the term "object oriented". And he is often quoted as having said that what we call OO today is not what he meant. For example, I just found this on Google: "I made up the term 'object-oriented', and I can tell you I didn't have C++ in mind" - Alan Kay, OOPSLA '97 I vaguely remember hearing something pretty insightful about what he did mean. Something along the lines of "message passing". Do you know what he meant? Can you fill in more details of what he meant and how it differs from today's common OO? Please share some references if you have any. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to program for constraints/rules

    - by Gaurav
    First the background, during interviews in the past, many times I have been asked to design some or other variation of card game as programming puzzle, and I have tried to design it in OO way, but I have never been satisfied with my solutions. However it was not until recently that I realized that I had been approaching the problem from the wrong direction. Specifically I was trying to solve the problem by modeling individual card as an object. Problem with this is individual cards don't have any non-trivial intrinsic behavior and therefore are not suitable (or primary) candidate as objects. What is interesting and important about cards are rules and constraints, such as there could be only four suits, or only thirteen cards in each suit. Of course, then there are any number of rules for games. So my questions are Are there any idioms/constructs/patterns to program for rules & constraints. How many in 1 can be applied in conjunction with OO paradigm.

    Read the article

  • So what *did* Alan Kay really mean by the term "object-oriented"?

    - by Charlie Flowers
    Reportedly, Alan Kay is the inventor of the term "object oriented". And he is often quoted as having said that what we call OO today is not what he meant. For example, I just found this on Google: I made up the term 'object-oriented', and I can tell you I didn't have C++ in mind -- Alan Kay, OOPSLA '97 I vaguely remember hearing something pretty insightful about what he did mean. Something along the lines of "message passing". Do you know what he meant? Can you fill in more details of what he meant and how it differs from today's common OO? Please share some references if you have any. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is there any reason to use "plain old data" classes?

    - by Michael
    In legacy code I occasionally see classes that are nothing but wrappers for data. something like: class Bottle { int height; int diameter; Cap capType; getters/setters, maybe a constructor } My understanding of OO is that classes are structures for data and the methods of operating on that data. This seems to preclude objects of this type. To me they are nothing more than structs and kind of defeat the purpose of OO. I don't think it's necessarily evil, though it may be a code smell. Is there a case where such objects would be necessary? If this is used often, does it make the design suspect?

    Read the article

  • Is there any reason to use "container" classes?

    - by Michael
    I realize the term "container" is misleading in this context - if anyone can think of a better term please edit it in. In legacy code I occasionally see classes that are nothing but wrappers for data. something like: class Bottle { int height; int diameter; Cap capType; getters/setters, maybe a constructor } My understanding of OO is that classes are structures for data and the methods of operating on that data. This seems to preclude objects of this type. To me they are nothing more than structs and kind of defeat the purpose of OO. I don't think it's necessarily evil, though it may be a code smell. Is there a case where such objects would be necessary? If this is used often, does it make the design suspect?

    Read the article

  • Object Oriented programming on 8-bit MCU Case Study

    - by Calvin Grier
    I see that there's a lot of questions related to OO Programming here. I'm actually trying to find a specific resource related to embedded OO approaches for an 8 bit MCU. Several years back (maybe 6) I was looking for material related to Object Oriented programming for resource constrained 8051 microprocessors. I found an article/website with a case history of a design group that used a very small RAM part, and implemented many Object based constructs during their C design and development. I believe it was an 8051. The project was a success, and managed to stay inside the very small ROM/RAM they had available. I'm attempting to find it again, but Google can't locate it. The article was well written, and recommended a "mixed" approach using C methods for inheritance and encapsulation - if I recall correctly. Can anyone help me locate this article?

    Read the article

  • Good Literature for "Object oriented programming in C"

    - by Dipan Mehta
    This is not a debate question about whether or not C is a good candidate for Object oriented programming or not. Quite often C is the primary platform where the development is happening. I have seen, and hopefully learnt through crawling many open source and commercial projects - that while the language inherently doesn't stop you if you create "non-object" code. However, you can still think in the "Object" way and reasonably write code that captures this designs thinking. For those who has done this, OO way is still the best way to write code even when you are programming in C. While, I have learnt most of it through the hard way, are there any deep literature that can help educate the relatively young guys about how to do OO programming in C?

    Read the article

  • Objected oriented approach to structure inside structure

    - by RishiD
    This is for C++ but should apply to any OO language. Trying to figure out the correct object oriented apporach to do the following (this is what I do in C). struct Container { enum type; union { TypeA a; TypeB b; }; } The type field determines if it TypeA or TypeB object. I am using this to handle responses coming back from a connection, they get parsed and get put into this structure and then based on the message type the appropriate fields get filled in. e.g. struct Container parseResponse(bufferIn, bufferLength); Is there an OO approach for doing this?

    Read the article

  • Headset undetected when plugged in

    - by tough
    I have recently installed Ubuntu 12.04 in my machine which was running windows 7. I have been trying to configure the audio to work exactly as it used to work in Windows but never been able to do so. I have followed this link exactly. I am still not getting the required configuration. aslamixer command shows me with 5 adjustable controls as shown below Master "adjustable" Speaker "adjustable" PCM "adjustable" Front "adjustable" AND Beep "adjustable" Mic Jack Mic In or Lin In S/PDIF OO "in a box" S/PDIF D OO "in a box" S/PDIF P DIGITAL or Analog M It does not detect the headset jack when plugged in. I here mean to say that the sound form the speakers does not go off when I plug in my headset jack. How can I make this working. Some other googling also did not help. I am on Hp Pavilion DV7 machine. The chip is IDT 92HD75B3X5 and the card is HDA ATI SB.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >