macos – How can I use Spotlight to search exclusively in `.txt` files in` ~ / .` on my disk?

I was talking to Mr. Ramanujan at his office when he gave me his cell phone number.

I remember an open text editor and I wrote the number in a file. Normally, I store these details in ~/phone-numbers.txtbut this time I seem to have inadvertently written to another file.

No problem. j & # 39; uses Spotlight Search search Ramanujanbut it produces irrelevant search results from the famous mathematician, on and off of my computer, especially off.

How can I search Ramanujan only in .txt files in rooted files to ~/.?

algorithms – Binary search symbols table

Hi, I am trying to learn myself from algorithms (Sedgewick) and I have encountered the following problem:

3.1.15: Assume that searches are 1,000 times more frequent 
than insertions for a BinarySearchST client. Estimate the 
percentage of the total time that is devoted to insertions, 
when the number of searches is 10^3, 10^6, and 10^9.

As stated in the problem Searches (S) = 1000 * Inserts (I)

  • $ S = 10 ^ 3 to I = 1 $
  • $ S = 10 ^ 6 to I = 10 ^ 3 $
  • $ S = 10 ^ 9 to I = 10 ^ 6 $

At this stage of the book, we use simple tables and linked lists to save the symbol table (inefficient hash maps, trees, etc.). This would mean that the searches take ~ log2 (N) times and the insertions take ~ N / 2 times (assuming a uniform distribution on which the inserts are placed).

Am I right to calculate the percentage of insertion into the search time would be approximately:

$ frac {Inserts times N / 2} {Searches times log_2 (N)} $

Using $ Searches = 10 ^ 3 times inserts $ this reduces to

$ frac {N / 2} {(10 ^ 3 times log_2 (N)} $

This would mean that the percentage strongly depends on the initial size of the symbol table and that it is not a constant percentage that we can use to answer the question.

Any suggestions on what I'm saying, should I assume the initial size of the table?

How can I prevent the search for ads on a site with a custom Google search engine?

I just configured this thing and it works fine.

How can I prevent it from showing ads? I have accessed almost everywhere in the admin panel of but I can not find anything related to it.

Perfect Internet search for data entry at $ 7

Perfect Internet search for data entry

As an expert and experienced person, I assure you that I will finish your project perfectly as soon as possible.

I am an expert in:

  • Typing
  • Microsoft Word
  • Microsoft Excel
  • Microsoft Powerpoint
  • Data Management (Online / Offline)
  • Management of duplicates
  • Data gathering
  • Calendar Management
  • Office Administration
  • PDF image
  • Excel to Pdf
  • PDF to Excel
  • PDF to Word
  • Word to Pdf

Order now !!!

. (tagsToTranslate) Dataentry

sort – How to make an inverted topological sorting using depth search first?

I replace the venerable make utility that will support, among other things, automatic cleaning. The utility automatically determines which files and directories are targets, and then deletes them if the user wants to perform a cleanup operation. However, a file can reside in an automatically created directory, which means that I should perform topological sorting of targets. Each file has an arc to the parent directory and each directory has an arc to its parent. So, for example:

  • objhierarchy/obj/foo.o has a bow towards objhierarchy/obj
  • objhierarchy/obj has a bow towards objhierarchy

What complicates things is that the files must be deleted in the reverse order. So, in the given example, you need this order: (1) objhierarchy/obj/foo.o, (2) objhierarchy/obj, (3) objhierarchy.

The topological type seems to be a good solution, but it gives the opposite order. Thus, a topological kind of the parent graph of the repertoire would give (1) objhierarchy, (2) objhierarchy/obj, (3) objhierarchy/obj/foo.o.

One solution might be a reverse pointer buffer in place (or simply iterated in the reverse order), but I would like to avoid allocating additional memory.

What is the best way to delete files in the reverse order? Can the topological sort algorithm based on the first depth search be modified to call a callback function in reverse order?

SP Online: search and offline availability not visible under Site Settings [I am Site Admin]

This is a very strange problem, I had the habit of having the option of & # 39; Offline Search & Availability & # 39; under Site Settings, but suddenly, it disappeared.

enter the description of the image here


Site: SharePoint online

Authorization: Site Collection Administrator and Site Owner

A reason for this behavior?

Path Search – Theta Star Algorithm with Line of Sight

I've finished my A star algorithm and I have to add the Theta star job, but I have to call the line of sight algorithm. I am working on trajectory planning for a UAV and have created a 2D grid. This grid has obstacles and no obstacles and there is an elevation chart for these obstacles, to take into account the height of the obstacles. I have to implement the line of sight in Python, considering the elevation of these obstacles in relation to the fixed height of the drone. Can I get help from you? Any line of sight of python code algorithm or steps that could help me in the implementation?

Free – Job Search Moderator | Promotion Forum

It's a social forum where everyone can get away from the outside world and relax and be oneself. It's a cool and relaxed forum, with features that I've put in place once I've got a stable membership base. There will be different unique categories, which will be implemented as the forum progresses.

algorithms – Temporal complexity of the predecessor search for a dictionary implemented as a sorted array

I'm reading "The Algorithm Design Manual" by Steven Skiena. On page 73, he discusses the time complexity of the implementation $ Predecessor (D, k) $ and $ Successor (D, k) $ and suggests that it takes O (1) time.

If the data structure looks something like

((k0, x), (k1, x), ...)

where the keys k0 at kn are sorted, given k, I thought the successor(D, k) should first look in the sorted table k ( $ O (log n) $ ) then recover the successor ( $ O (1) $ Since the table is sorted, the overall time complexity should be $ O (log n) $ instead of $ O (1) $ as mentioned in the book. This should also apply for predecessor(D, k).

For an unsorted array, the temporal complexity of the predecessor and successor remains the same. $ O (n) $ since the search in the unsorted table also takes $ O (n) $.

Did I misunderstand something?