computer science area (7 Viewers)

[Martin]

++ [ originally posted by maxmc ] ++
and tell me, which professonials use pcs?? secretaries who use word to type in some texts?????

Most pros use pcs, that's how the market share of the pc/windows is much higher than that of mac, the home use of pcs can in no way account for a 90% share.

And as for secretaries, if macs are better, why didn't they get macs? Who cares what they need them for?

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Reza]

++ [ originally posted by Alex ] ++


You need to locate your XF86Config, sometimes named XF86Config-4 and change the settings.

# locate XF86Config
/etc/X11/XF86Config-4
# nano /etc/X11/XF86Config-4

In the file, under Section "Screen" you should see various resolutions listed, just edit the list and change the default one.

Great stuff

thats why i put step in linux with fear.but i like its challenges.:excited:

 

[Martin]

Linux is cool

 

[Reza]

one of my close friends is a linux freak ,he gets nervous:fero: when we talk about microsoft , yestreday he's talkin' about lindows ,what he said sounds intresting to me but he himself even hasn't lindos installed .
i'd like to know if you've tried it ? how is it?

 

[Martin]

I've tried Lindows 2.0 and it's pretty strange really It installs pretty fast, sets up all your drivers, display, mouse, all the things that will normally make you struggle in Linux. It runs on Debian and KDE so you have the underlying Debian structure and functions. Once you've installed the OS and you're all set up, it's kind of like Windows, you have a start menu where you'll find settings, software etc. You also have a software distribution package, that is paying the $99 for Lindows gives you access to a wide variety of software, just click on it from the list, it will automatically download, install, configure. So it makes Linux simpler and more enjoyable I think.

Here's a more in-depth review:
http://info.lindows.com/extreme-tech-oct4.htm

 

[Reza]

cool sites
www.codeproject.com
www.opencores.com

 

[Desmond]

i think this thread should be renamed:for all geeks only

 

[Loppan]

I have a problem with arrays.

Let's say I have arrays: 23,25,28,29,24,27

How do I find the oldest person in the array. I have done something like this:

public int oldest() {

int old=arr[0]; // I know this line is wrong

for(int i=0;i<objects;i++) {
if (arr<old)
old=arr;
}
return old;


}

 

[Martin]

YES! The thread is getting more geeky by the post, I like that! :devil:

I'm assuming you are trying to find the largest integer in the array, as opposed to its positioning within the array. I might suggest something like..

public int oldest() {

  int[] arr = {23,25,28,29,24,27}; //declare array

  int old=arr[0]; // looks ok to me

  for (int i=0;i<arr.length;i++) {
    if (arr[i]>old) // element i is greater than old, not smaller
      old=arr[i];
  }
  return old;

}

 

[BigIzz]

++ [ originally posted by Alex ] ++
YES! The thread is getting more geeky by the post, I like that! :devil:

:LOL:

 

[Martin]

There are exceptions of course...

 

[BigIzz]

I guess my laughing is too cool for this geeky thread

 

[Loppan]

++ [ originally posted by Alex ] ++
YES! The thread is getting more geeky by the post, I like that! :devil:

I'm assuming you are trying to find the largest integer in the array, as opposed to its positioning within the array. I might suggest something like..

public int oldest() {

  int[] arr = {23,25,28,29,24,27}; //declare array

  int old=arr[0]; // looks ok to me

  for (int i=0;i<arr.length;i++) {
    if (arr[i]>old) // element i is greater than old, not smaller
      old=arr[i];
  }
  return old;

}

Thanks! Just one more question. What if you don't know the numbers .

Should it be like this then:
int[] arr = arr

 

[Majed]

++ [ originally posted by Alex ] ++
YES! The thread is getting more geeky by the post, I like that! :devil:

I'm assuming you are trying to find the largest integer in the array, as opposed to its positioning within the array. I might suggest something like..

public int oldest() {

  int[] arr = {23,25,28,29,24,27}; //declare array

  int old=arr[0]; // looks ok to me

  for (int i=0;i<arr.length;i++) {
    if (arr[i]>old) // element i is greater than old, not smaller
      old=arr[i];
  }
  return old;

}

too easy Martin, though your not very efficient....

just a minor adjustment in the for loop since i'm a perfectionist..

for (int i=1 ;i<arr.length;i++) {
if (arr>old) // element i is greater than old, not smaller
old=arr;
}

That should remove the unnessesary first check...

 

[Martin]

Loppan, to declare an empty array you would have:
int[] arr = new int[6];

Majed, you're a jerk, I left it like that on purpose

 

[Majed]

++ [ originally posted by Alex ] ++
Loppan, to declare an empty array you would have:
int[] arr = new int[6];

Majed, you're a jerk, I left it like that on purpose

i assumed it was a compenent variable
and it should have already been declarred in the constructor...


and watch ur language Mr.President .... sir

 

[Martin]

Well, do you see a constructor? No? Well then let's TRY to keep things simple to suit the example at hand, shall we?

 

[Majed]

++ [ originally posted by Alex ] ++
Well, do you see a constructor? No? Well then let's TRY to keep things simple to suit the example at hand, shall we?

:LOL: :LOL:

ur really pi$$ed .....
:LOL:

did i hit a weak spot?!!
just admit that i got u

its ok man....we all make mistakes (maybe i should take away the nickname "geek" from u, u dont deserve it )

 

[Martin]

I'm very touchy about my java...

 

[Majed]

no $hit shurlock!!!
i could tell from ur first reply with "jerk"....:LOL:


i'm not gonna take that against u because i'm the same way......

but i'm glad, now i know what button to push to pi$$ u off!! :LOL: