Search Results

Search found 21107 results on 845 pages for 'size optimization'.

Page 8/845 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • jquery .children() returning wrong size

    - by i need help
    Hi guys, I just found the children size not consistent. Below attach full code with alert, for easy reference. Is the way I get the data wrong? <body> <table width="100" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"> <tr> <td height="30" valign="top"><strong>Header Title</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td height="32" valign="top">Date : <strong>01/01/2010 </strong> <br><div><b></b></div><span></span></td> </tr> </table> </body> $("td").each(function() { alert($(this).children().size()); }); //first td showing 1 direct children- <strong> //second td showing 4 direct children- <strong> <br> <div> <span> ----- $("tr").each(function() { alert($(this).children().size()); }); //first tr showing 1 direct children - <td> //second tr showing 1 direct children - <td> ----- $("table").each(function() { alert($(this).children().size()); }); // ERROR // this table showing 1 direct children only.... something WRONG. // I thought there are 2 <tr> inside this table?

    Read the article

  • Common optimization rules

    - by mafutrct
    This is a dangerous question, so let me try to phrase it correctly. Premature optimization is the root of all evil, but if you know you need it, there is a basic set of rules that should be considered. This set is what I'm wondering about. For instance, imagine you got a list of a few thousand items. How do you look up an item with a specific, unique ID? Of course, you simply use a Dictionary to map the ID to the item. And if you know that there is a setting stored in a database that is required all the time, you simply cache it instead of issuing a database request hundred times a second. I guess there are a few even more basic ideas. I am specifically not looking for "don't do it, for experts: don't do it yet" or "use a profiler" answers, but for really simple, general hints. If you feel this is an argumentative question, you probably misunderstood my intention.

    Read the article

  • Which isometric angles can be mirrored (and otherwise transformed) for optimization?

    - by Tom
    I am working on a basic isometric game, and am struggling to find the correct mirrors. Mirror can be any form of transform. I have managed to get SE out of SW, by scaling the sprite on X axis by -1. Same applies for NE angle. Something is bugging me, that I should be able to also mirror N to S, but I cannot manage to pull this one off. Am I just too sleepy and trying to do the impossible, or a basic -1 scale on Y axis is not enough? What are the common used mirror table for optimizing 8 angle (N, NE, E, SE, S, SW, W, NW) isometric sprites?

    Read the article

  • When should an API favour optimization over readability and ease-of-use?

    - by jmlane
    I am in the process of designing a small library, where one of my design goals is to use as much of the native domain language as possible in the API. While doing so, I've noticed that there are some cases in the API outline where a more intuitive, readable attribute/method call requires some functionally unnecessary encapsulation. Since the final product will not necessarily require high performance, I am unconcerned about making the decision to favour ease-of-use in my current project over the most efficient implementation of the code in question. I know not to assume readability and ease-of-use are paramount in all expected use-cases, such as when performance is required. I would like to know if there are more general reasons that argue for an API design preferring (marginally) more efficient implementations?

    Read the article

  • When should code favour optimization over readability and ease-of-use?

    - by jmlane
    I am in the process of designing a small library, where one of my design goals is that the API should be as close to the domain language as possible. While working on the design, I've noticed that there are some cases in the code where a more intuitive, readable attribute/method call requires some functionally unnecessary encapsulation. Since the final product will not necessarily require high performance, I am unconcerned about making the decision to favour ease-of-use in my current project over the most efficient implementation of the code in question. I know not to assume readability and ease-of-use are paramount in all expected use-cases, such as when performance is required. I would like to know if there are more general reasons that argue for a design preferring more efficient implementations—even if only marginally so?

    Read the article

  • Interface Photoshop size for iPhone app

    - by Sorin M
    Hello, I am building an iPhone app interface and I know the dpi has to be 163, but when it comes to the size of the file, I was looking through all the recommendations and found 2 different answers... Does anyone know what size should i set the Photoshop file at? The answers I have so far are: "The screen on the iPhone is 480×320, minus the 20-pixel status bar (making a 460×320 working screen size). The screen shots on the App Store should not include the status bar." "400 x 320 or 960 x 640 (iPhone 4) You must also consider the landscape mode (320 x 400 and 640 x 960)" I would really appreciate the answer. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • very quickly getting total size of folder

    - by freakazo
    I want to quickly find the total size of any folder using python. def GetFolderSize(path): TotalSize = 0 for item in os.walk(path): for file in item[2]: try: TotalSize = TotalSize + getsize(join(item[0], file)) except: print("error with file: " + join(item[0], file)) return TotalSize That's the simple script I wrote to get the total size of the folder, it took around 60 seconds (+-5 seconds). By using multiprocessing I got it down to 23 seconds on a quad core machine. Using the Windows file explorer it takes only ~3 seconds (Right click- properties to see for yourself). So is there a faster way of finding the total size of a folder close to the speed that windows can do it? Windows 7, python 2.6 (Did searches but most of the time people used a very similar method to my own) Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Dijit.Dialog 1.4, setting size is limited to 600x400 no matter what size I set it.

    - by John Evans
    I'm trying to set the size of a dijit.Dialog, but it seems limited to 600x400, no matter what size I set it. I've copied the code from dojocampus and the dialog appear, but when i set the size larger, it only shows 600x400. Using firebug and selecting items inside the dialog, I see that they are larger than the dialog, but don't show correctly. I set it up to scroll, but the bottom of the scrollbar is out of view. In firebug, I've check the maxSize from _Widget and it is set to infinity. Here is my code to set the dialog. <div id="sized" dojoType="dijit.Dialog" title="My scrolling dialog"> <div style="width: 580px; height: 600px; overflow: scroll;"> Any suggestions for sizing the dialog box larger?

    Read the article

  • Calculating the pixel size of a string with Python

    - by Aristide
    I have a Python script which needs to calculate the exact size of arbitrary strings displayed in arbitrary fonts in order to generate simple diagrams. I can easily do it with Tkinter. The problem is the results seem to depend on the version of Python and/or the system. import Tkinter as tk import tkFont root = tk.Tk() times12 = tkFont.Font(family="times",size=12) print times12.metrics("linespace"), print times12.measure("Hello world") times24 = tkFont.Font(family="times",size=24) print times24.metrics("linespace"), print times24.measure("Hello world") Python 2.5 on Mac OS X gives the actual pixel measurements: 12 57 24 116 Python 2.6.1 on Mac OS X gives: 14 58 27 115 Python 2.6.3 on Windows XP gives: 19 71 36 154 Such a need being quite common, I suspect I did something wrong. Any idea?

    Read the article

  • In C, as free() knows an array size, why isn't there a function that gets the array size? [closed]

    - by user354959
    Possible Duplicate: If free() knows the length of my array, why can’t I ask for it in my own code? Searching around (including here at stackoverflow), I got that malloc() allocates an array and also creates a header to control the array info. In this header, there's also the array size. free() use such information to know how to deallocate that array. So, if the array size info is "there" (somewhere in the memory), why there isn't a function that returns an array size, looking for this at the array header? Or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • Differing form size between XP and 7

    - by Andy
    I am developing a C# WinForms app on my XP dev machine with Visual C# Express 2008. I set the form to have a size of my liking with Width and Height on the designer and all looks good. I also set these dimensions to the MaximumSize property. Deploying the app to another XP machine, and the app looks like it does on my dev. However, in testing the app on a Win7 machine, the form has both horizontal and vertical scrollbars applied. I assume that this is due to the changed non-client size of the form, as determined by Win7. I can resize the window, but I would like it to be displayed correctly to begin with. So, my question is: What is the best way to correctly maintain a form size client area across OS'es? Thanks all.

    Read the article

  • Can knowing C actually hurt the code you write in higher level languages?

    - by Jurily
    The question seems settled, beaten to death even. Smart people have said smart things on the subject. To be a really good programmer, you need to know C. Or do you? I was enlightened twice this week. The first one made me realize that my assumptions don't go further than my knowledge behind them, and given the complexity of software running on my machine, that's almost non-existent. But what really drove it home was this Slashdot comment: The end result is that I notice the many naive ways in which traditional C "bare metal" programmers assume that higher level languages are implemented. They make bad "optimization" decisions in projects they influence, because they have no idea how a compiler works or how different a good runtime system may be from the naive macro-assembler model they understand. Then it hit me: C is just one more abstraction, like all others. Even the CPU itself is only an abstraction! I've just never seen it break, because I don't have the tools to measure it. I'm confused. Has my mind been mutilated beyond recovery, like Dijkstra said about BASIC? Am I living in a constant state of premature optimization? Is there hope for me, now that I realized I know nothing about anything? Is there anything to know, even? And why is it so fascinating, that everything I've written in the last five years might have been fundamentally wrong? To sum it up: is there any value in knowing more than the API docs tell me? EDIT: Made CW. Of course this also means now you must post examples of the interpreter/runtime optimizing better than we do :)

    Read the article

  • Finding perfect numbers in C# (optimization)

    - by paradox
    I coded up a program in C# to find perfect numbers within a certain range as part of a programming challenge . However, I realized it is very slow when calculating perfect numbers upwards of 10000. Are there any methods of optimization that exist for finding perfect numbers? My code is as follows: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; namespace ConsoleTest { class Program { public static List<int> FindDivisors(int inputNo) { List<int> Divisors = new List<int>(); for (int i = 1; i<inputNo; i++) { if (inputNo%i==0) Divisors.Add(i); } return Divisors; } public static void Main(string[] args) { const int limit = 100000; List<int> PerfectNumbers = new List<int>(); List<int> Divisors=new List<int>(); for (int i=1; i<limit; i++) { Divisors = FindDivisors(i); if (i==Divisors.Sum()) PerfectNumbers.Add(i); } Console.Write("Output ="); for (int i=0; i<PerfectNumbers.Count; i++) { Console.Write(" {0} ",PerfectNumbers[i]); } Console.Write("\n\n\nPress any key to continue . . . "); Console.ReadKey(true); } } }

    Read the article

  • sql-server performance optimization by removing print statements

    - by AG
    We're going through a round of sql-server stored procedure optimizations. The one recommendation we've found that clearly applies for us is 'SET NOCOUNT ON' at the top of each procedure. (Yes, I've seen the posts that point out issues with this depending on what client objects you run the stored procedures from but these are not issues for us.) So now I'm just trying to add in a bit of common sense. If the benefit of SET NOCOUNT ON is simply to reduce network traffic by some small amount every time, wouldn't it also make sense to turn off all the PRINT statements we have in the stored procedures that we only use for debugging? I can't see how it can hurt performance. OTOH, it's a bit of a hassle to implement due to the fact that some of the print statements are the only thing within else clauses, so you can't just always comment out the one line and be done. The change carries some amount of risk so I don't want to do it if it isn't going to actually help. But I don't see eliminating print statements mentioned anywhere in articles on optimization. Is that because it is so obvious no one bothers to mention it?

    Read the article

  • Simplification / optimization of GPS track

    - by GreyCat
    I've got a GPS track, produces by gpxlogger(1) (supplied as a client for gpsd). GPS receiver updates its coordinates every 1 second, gpxlogger's logic is very simple, it writes down location (lat, lon, ele) and a timestamp (time) received from GPS every n seconds (n = 3 in my case). After writing down a several hours worth of track, gpxlogger saves several megabyte long GPX file that includes several thousands of points. Afterwards, I try to plot this track on a map and use it with OpenLayers. It works, but several thousands of points make using the map a sloppy and slow experience. I understand that having several thousands of points of suboptimal. There are myriads of points that can be deleted without losing almost anything: when there are several points making up roughly the straight line and we're moving with the same constant speed between them, we can just leave the first and the last point and throw anything else. I thought of using gpsbabel for such track simplification / optimization job, but, alas, it's simplification filter works only with routes, i.e. analyzing only geometrical shape of path, without timestamps (i.e. not checking that the speed was roughly constant). Is there some ready-made utility / library / algorithm available to optimize tracks? Or may be I'm missing some clever option with gpsbabel?

    Read the article

  • Best font size for Latex Beamer

    - by SetJmp
    Hi Stackoverflow - I am preparing a presentation in latex using the beamer package. I am wondering what font size "pros" who give a lot of presentations use to make sure people in the back of the room can see. The default font size seems a bit small to me. Thanks, Setjmp

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio Font Size (Windows 7)

    - by Jay
    Hi, I've lately installed Windows 7. After opening my old C# project in visual studio i noticed that my buttons are too small (button.text didn't fit in). Why the hell did MS increase the standard font size (well font size is still set to 8, but it's somehow bigger now)? Can I fix it somehow, without correcting all my buttons etc. manually? Kind regards, Jay

    Read the article

  • Batch file that returns folder size

    - by Paul Wall
    Hi, I'm having space issues on my Vista machine and need to figure out what's taking up so much space. I would like to write a simple batch file that returns all folders under C: and the size of each folder. The dir command doesn't appear to return folder size. Unfortunately we don't have admin rights and can't install a third party application and we have other users in our group that also need this information. Thanks...

    Read the article

  • Permutations of Varying Size

    - by waiwai933
    I'm trying to write a function in PHP that gets all permutations of all possible sizes. I think an example would be the best way to start off: $my_array = array(1,1,2,3); Possible permutations of varying size: 1 1 // * See Note 2 3 1,1 1,2 1,3 // And so forth, for all the sets of size 2 1,1,2 1,1,3 1,2,1 // And so forth, for all the sets of size 3 1,1,2,3 1,1,3,2 // And so forth, for all the sets of size 4 Note: I don't care if there's a duplicate or not. For the purposes of this example, all future duplicates have been omitted. What I have so far in PHP: function getPermutations($my_array){ $permutation_length = 1; $keep_going = true; while($keep_going){ while($there_are_still_permutations_with_this_length){ // Generate the next permutation and return it into an array // Of course, the actual important part of the code is what I'm having trouble with. } $permutation_length++; if($permutation_length>count($my_array)){ $keep_going = false; } else{ $keep_going = true; } } return $return_array; } The closest thing I can think of is shuffling the array, picking the first n elements, seeing if it's already in the results array, and if it's not, add it in, and then stop when there are mathematically no more possible permutations for that length. But it's ugly and resource-inefficient. Any pseudocode algorithms would be greatly appreciated. Also, for super-duper (worthless) bonus points, is there a way to get just 1 permutation with the function but make it so that it doesn't have to recalculate all previous permutations to get the next? For example, I pass it a parameter 3, which means it's already done 3 permutations, and it just generates number 4 without redoing the previous 3? (Passing it the parameter is not necessary, it could keep track in a global or static). The reason I ask this is because as the array grows, so does the number of possible combinations. Suffice it to say that one small data set with only a dozen elements grows quickly into the trillions of possible combinations and I don't want to task PHP with holding trillions of permutations in its memory at once.

    Read the article

  • MySQL table organization and optimization (Rails)

    - by aguynamedloren
    I've been learning Ruby on Rails over the past few months with no prior programming experience. Lately, I've been thinking about database optimization and table organization. I know there are great books on the subject, but I typically learn by example / as I go. Here's a hypothetical situation: Let's say I am building a social network for a niche community with 250,000 members (users). The users have the ability to attend events. Let's say there are 50,000 past/present/future events. Much like Facebook events, a user can attend any number of events and an event can have any number of attendees. In the database, there would be a table for users and a table for events. Somehow I would have to create an association between the users and events. I could create an "events" column in the users table such that each user row would contain a hash of event IDs, or I could create an "attendees" column in the events table such that each event row would contain a hash of user IDs. Neither of these solutions seem ideal, however. On a users profile page, I want to display the list of events they are associated with, which would require scanning the 50,000 event rows for the user ID of said user if I include an "attendees" column in the events table. Likewise, on an event page, I want to display a list of attendees for the event, which would require scanning the 250,000 user rows for the event ID of said event if I include an "events" column in the users table. Option 3 would be to create a third table that contains the attendee information for each and every event - but I don't see how this would solve any problems. Are these non-issues? Rails makes accessing all of this information easy, but I guess I'm worried about scale. It is entirely possible that I am under-estimating the speed and processing power of modern databases / servers / etc. How long would it take to scan 250,000 user rows for specific event IDs - 10ms? 100ms? 1,000ms? I guess that's not that bad. Am I just over-thinking this?

    Read the article

  • Average and maximum size of directories

    - by Mircea
    I have a directory and a bunch of sub-directories like this: - directory1 (sub-dir1, sub-dir2, sub-dir3, sub-dir4, sub-dir5...........and so on, hundreds of them...) How do I find out what is average size of the sub-directories? And how do I find what is the maximum size of the sub-directories? All using Unix commands... Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to fix button size?

    - by rob
    I am using three buttons along with the list view.These three buttons are added to the layout using the TableRow.The first button takes more space on content, so the other two becomes smaller in size than first one. When the application runs, it doesn't even show the two other buttons. How can I make the size of three buttons equal and display all of them when application runs?

    Read the article

  • Create thumbnail and reduce image size

    - by oo
    I have very large images (jpg) and i want to write a csharp program to loop through the files and reduce the size of each image by 75%. I tried this: Image thumbNail = image.GetThumbnailImage(800, 600, null, new IntPtr()); but the file size is still very large. Is there anyway to create thumbnails and have the filesize be much smaller?

    Read the article

  • How to check total cache size using a program

    - by user1888541
    so I'm having some trouble creating a program to measure cache size in C. I understand the basic concept of going about this but I'm still having trouble figuring out exactly what I am doing wrong. Basically, I create an array of varying length (going by power of 2s) and access each element in the array and put it in a dummy variable. I go through the array and do this around 1000 times to negate the "noise" that would otherwise occur if I only did it once to get an accurate measurement for time. Then, I look for the size that causes a big jump in access time. Unfortunately, this is where I am having my problem, I don't see this jump using my code and clearly I am doing something wrong. Another thing is that I used /proc/cpuinfo to check the cache and it said the size was 6114 but that was not a power of 2. I was told to go by powers of 2 to figure out the cache can anyone explain why this is? Here is the just of my code...I will post the rest if need be { struct timeval start; struct timeval end; // int n = 1; // change this to test different sizes int array_size = 1048576*n; // I'm trying to check the time "manually" first before creating a loop for the program to do it by itself this is why I have a separate "n" variable to increase the size char x = 0; int i =0, j=0; char *a; a =malloc(sizeof(char) * (array_size)); gettimeofday(&start,NULL); for(i=0; i<1000; i++) { for(j=0; j < array_size; j += 1) { x = a[j]; } } gettimeofday(&end,NULL); int timeTaken = (end.tv_sec * 1000000 + end.tv_usec) - (start.tv_sec *1000000 + start.tv_usec); printf("Time Taken: %d \n", timeTaken); printf("Average: %f \n", (double)timeTaken/((double)array_size); }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >