Input : {5, 13, 6, 5, 13, 7, 8, 6, 5}
Output : {5, 5, 5, 13, 13, 6, 6, 7, 8}
Question is to arrange the numbers in the array in decreasing order of their frequency preserving the order of their occurrence.
If their is a tie, for example, here 13 and 6 then the number occurring first in input array would come first in output array.
Suppose that both FirstModule and SecondModule handle the Application_BeginRequest event. Will it execute in the order defined in the web.config?
<httpModules>
<add type="MyApp.FirstModule, MyApp" name="FirstModule"/>
<add type="MyApp.SecondModule, MyApp" name="SecondModule"/>
<add type="OtherApp.OtherModule, OtherApp" name="OtherModule"/>
</httpModules>
Are there other ways that the order can be specified?
Type mismatch. Expecting a LexBuffer but given a LexBuffer The type 'char' does not match the type 'byte'
This is the error message that I am getting while using fslex. I have tried manually checking every single occurrence of lexbuf and its type. It's LexBuffer everywhere. But still the compiler is giving me the above error. Can you please tell me why this error occurs and how to go about resolving it.
Thanks,
chandrasekhar
When selecting columns from a MySQL table, is performance affected by the order that you select the columns as compared to their order in the table (not considering indexes that may cover the columns)?
For example, you have a table with rows uid, name, bday, and you have the following query.
SELECT uid, name, bday FROM table
Does MySQL see the following query any differently and thus cause any sort of performance hit?
SELECT uid, bday, name FROM table
Is converting a file to a byte array the best way to save ANY file format to disk or database var binary column?
So if someone wants to save a .gif or .doc/.docx or .pdf file, can I just convert it to a bytearray UFT8 and save it to the db as a stream of bytes?
While there are multiple ways to reverse bit order in a byte, I'm curious as to what is the "simplest" for a developer to implement. And by reversing I mean:
1110 -> 0111
0010 -> 0100
This is similar to, but not a duplicate of this PHP question.
In PHP I'm running a mysql_query that has an ORDER BY clause. I'm then iterating through the results to build an associative array, with the row_id as the key.
Then, I'm calling json_encode on that array and outputting the result.
This page is loaded with AJAX, and defined in a Javascript variable. When I iterate through that Javascript variable, will I still have the order that was returned from the mysql_query?
I have a list of items in a generic list:
A1 (sort index 1)
A2 (sort index 2)
B1 (sort index 3)
B2 (sort index 3)
B3 (sort index 3)
The comparator on them takes the form:
this.sortIndex.CompareTo(other.sortIndex)
When I do a List.Sort() on the list of items, I get the following order out:
A1
A2
B3
B2
B1
It has obviously worked in the sense that the sort indexes are in the right order, but I really don't want it to be re-ordering the 'B' items.
Is there any tweak I can make to my comparator to fix this?
I'm looking to get query results back from Linq in the order that I pass IDs to the query. So it would look something like this:
var IDs = new int [] { 5, 20, 10 }
var items = from mytable in db.MyTable
where IDs.Contains(mytable.mytableID)
orderby // not sure what to do here
select mytable;
I'm hoping to get items in the order of IDs (5, 20, 10).
(Note this is similar to this question, but I would like to do it in Linq instead of SQL)
Open a file in the Visual Studio binary editor that contains a null byte (0x00), then use the Quick Find feature (Ctrl +F) to find null bytes.
I would have thought I could use a regular expression such as \x00 to match null bytes but it doesn't work. Searching for any other hex value using this method works fine.
Is this a VS bug, 'feature', or am I just missing something? Is there a work around?
Lazy programmer alert. :)
Cassandra stores column values as bytes (Java example). Specifying a LongType comparator compares those bytes as a long. I want the value of a long into a Cassandra-friendly byte[]. How? I poked around for awhile. I think you people can help me faster.
I am looking for a tool to give me a byte count of ViewState after each postback (full or partial) to make sure that I'm not keeping any controls' states around unnecessarily. Is there a tool out there?
I'm looking for an efficient way of storing an ordered list/set of items where:
The order of items in the master set changes rapidly (subsets maintain the master set's order)
Many subsets can be defined and retrieved
The number of members in the master set grow rapidly
Members are added to and removed from subsets frequently
Must allow for somewhat efficient merging of any number of subsets
Performance would ideally be biased toward retrieval of the first N items of any subset (or merged subset), and storage would be in-memory (and maybe eventually persistent on disk)
I've been handed a Byte[] that contains a file. I need to pass this to another method that is expecting two parameters, a char* to the beginning of the file and a char* to the end of the file.
I'm assuming I need to pin the array first so it doesn't get collected. I don't imagine I can then just cast the first and last elements, right?
data <- read.delim("C:\\test.txt", header = FALSE, sep = "$$$$$")
Error in scan(file, what = "", sep = sep, quote = quote, nlines = 1, quiet = TRUE, :
invalid 'sep' value: must be one byte
Why there is a restriction like this? Can I overcome it?
When you subscribe to an event in .NET, the subscription is added to a multicast delegate. When the event is fired, the delegates are called in the order they were subscribed.
I'd like to override the subscription somehow, so that the subscriptions are actually fired in the reverse order. Can this be done, and how?
I think something like this might be what I need?:
public event MyReversedEvent
{
add { /* magic! */ }
remove { /* magic! */ }
}
Design an algorithm with min time and space
here is my solution -
assume a array of N elements with 32 bit integers
use a bit array to set the appropriate bits
the array is sorted now
assign even numbers to the first half of the array in ascending order
assign odd numbers to the second half of the array in descending order
any better solution ?
A hypothetical scenario:
I've got a project whose source compliance level is specified to 1.5.
Now I compile this project with two different JDKs: At first with JDK 6 Update 7 and then with JDK 6 Update 20.
Do these two different JDKs produce different Java byte code, although they only differ in their Update version?
I have to write a drop down query for countries.
But USA should always be first.
The rest of the countries are in alphabetical order
I tried the following query
SELECT
countries_id
,countries_name
FROM get_countries
WHERE
countries_id = 138
UNION
SELECT
countries_id
,countries_name
FROM get_countries
WHERE
countries_id != 138
ORDER BY 2 ASC
Im creating a download speed test, and im downloading a 800megabit file to a Byte[] in a memory stream with
webClient.DownloadDataAsync(new Uri(link), memStreamArray);
How can i check how many bits are in the memStreamArray while downloading?
I need this so i can do a calculation on size / time to get the speed in realtime.
Im planing on performing this calculation in the webClient.DownloadProgressChanged event.
I want to implement the 1140grid at my site. The layout is pretty simple:
100% header
25% sidebar 75% page
100% footer
see also http://jsfiddle.net/KB5Nq/
the problem is that i would like to change the stack order when the site is in mobile view:
100% header
100% page
100% sidebar
100% footer
however, by default it arranges the blocks in the same order as they appear in the source code: header, sidebar, page, footer.
is there an easy css-only fix for that?
Hello,
I have an int value which needs to be converted into a byte array.
How do you go about doing this in Objective-C? Are there methods to do this?
Thank you,
I have a strange problem,
I am trying to order the output of a set of records by a field called displayOrder. Now even though record A has a displayOrder of 2 and record B has a displayOrder of 1000, record B still shows up before record A. Here's my select statement:
SELECT * FROM items ORDER BY displayOrder ASC
It works fine until I have a record greater than 9, then 10, 11, 12, etc are seen as smaller than 2, 3, 4 because they start with the number 1. Any way to fox this?