Jump to content

Ponch

Patron
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,344

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Donations

    0.00 USD 

  • Country

    Netherlands

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Ponch

    optimizing moves in a queue/stack (sorting TV channels)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    :(  I tried, I tried. I got dropbox and TurboC (Im on Win7 here), I tried to compile the C bit on that page I linked. It says there is an error (warning). There seems to be a typo on line 30; that "%d" seems to be coming from nowhere but I don't know what it should be replaced with.

    #include <stdio.h>#include <stdlib.h> struct node {	int val, len;	struct node *next;}; void lis(int *v, int len){	int i;	struct node *p, *n = calloc(len, sizeof *n);	for (i = 0; i < len; i++)		n[i].val = v[i]; 	for (i = len; i--; ) {		// find longest chain that can follow n[i]		for (p = n + i; p++ < n + len; ) {			if (p->val > n[i].val && p->len >= n[i].len) {				n[i].next = p;				n[i].len = p->len + 1;			}		}	} 	// find longest chain	for (i = 0, p = n; i < len; i++)		if (n[i].len > p->len) p = n + i; 	do printf(" %d", p->val); while ((p = p->next));	putchar('\n'); 	free(n);} int main(void){	int x[] = { 3, 2, 6, 4, 5, 1 };	int y[] = { 7,8,9,1,2,49,16,139,140,141,142,143,74,18,81,90,68,69,70,92,14,61,120,3,11,4,5,17,12,13,76,72,73,116,117,10,45,170,44,55,85,121,122,128,82,34,83,59,136,75,151,80,169,84,172,161,35,52,43,164,56,53,54,37,38,71,123,134,138,165,152,15,166,79,167,163,133,36,40,126,144,88,67,517,518}; 	lis(x, sizeof(x) / sizeof(int));	lis(y, sizeof(y) / sizeof(int));	return 0;}
    0

    optimizing moves in a queue/stack (sorting TV channels)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I'll probably do that tomorrow night.

    I'm not familiar at all with any of those methods to find out the "Longest Increasing Subsequence".

    The existing sequence is this (those should get from 1 to 85);

    7,8,9,1,2,49,16,139,140,141,142,143,74,18,81,90,68,69,70,92,14,61,120,3,11,4,5,17,12,13,76,72,73,116,117,10,45,170,44,55,85,121,122,128,82,34,83,59,136,75,151,80,169,84,172,161,35,52,43,164,56,53,54,37,38,71,123,134,138,165,152,15,166,79,167,163,133,36,40,126,144,88,67,517,518

     

    I'm sure lots of people here could do that in 3 copy/paste. :angel

    0

    optimizing moves in a queue/stack (sorting TV channels)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I'll read most of that (I studied physics few years long time ago but my brain's sharpness is very far from what it was at the time).

    The actual commands you have available on that TV set may make one way simpler than another.

    The fact I have to navigate through the channel's list to go "fetch" them is a factor. I can "page up/page down" 10 channels at a time in that purpose.

    0

    optimizing moves in a queue/stack (sorting TV channels)

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I know I'm going to loose more time than I'll win by discussing this, but just for the curiosity...

    I'm sorting the channels on a relative's TV (he's in hospital so I have a few days to do that  :} hopefully he'll appreciate). We've all done that 30 times in our lives (on VCRs and others), you move them like mad until you're done or the remote's batteries are dead.

    I was wondering if there was a method to do as few moves as possible.

    Normally, I'd start with the channel I want to place in #1 and go fetch it and place it there, that is...unless I see an obvious best move. That's where logic becomes vague and I stop thinking. :puke:

    An "obvious best move" would be this kind of thing; if 1-2-3-4-5 has to become 2-3-4-5-1, moving 1 to the end is the best move (instead of moving 2 to 1, 3 to 2 etc) but you have to see it and that was a really obvious one.

    Are there methods to do that in a sensible way ? I'm talking about 85 channels I'm moving to front from a list of 175. Google doesn't seem to be my friend.

    0

    Windows 7 laptop over heating

    in Windows 7

    Posted

    That computer with 4Gig of RAM should run Win7 just fine. Obviously,

    -Win7 is unlikely to have introduced a ton of dust in your laptop.

    -Dust is unlikely to get your CPU to 93%

    If your CPU is 93% when doing nothing, something went wrong with your install or you have wrong/missing drivers or you have malware or unwanted/unneeded programs.

    0

    Windows 7 laptop over heating

    in Windows 7

    Posted

    95°C is bad, very bad. Were your 47° measured long time ago or a few days/weeks before the Windows7 install ?

    Does the CPU hit the roof as well (in Task Manager) ? Does the fan run all the time? The battery is not an issue unless you have the impression that the battery heats up itself.

    0

    Integrate drivers to the XP installation CD?

    in Unattended Windows 2000/XP/2003

    Posted

    AFAIK:

    1. you cannot (should not) EVER run nlite on an already nlited source

     

    This is a bit extreme. I'm not encouraging doing it but in most cases you can for instance add drivers to an already nLited disc, as long as the .inf files don't have the same names. You can also remove more components. You can use modules you didn't use before (for example you add drivers and a Service Pack, next you add hotfixes and/or remove components).

    Let's say it's never EVER recommended.

    0

    Avira 14 seems to cause slow startup

    in Windows XP

    Posted

    Does anyone notice a serious delay and unresponsive system before Avira's little umbrella gets open? I get high CPU from Avira's services for several minutes on 2 different computers running XP. This is since little less than a week. Avira (Antivir free) is up to date. On one of those systems, a dual boot with Avira 9 sees no delay. :}

    I can't see any recent post about this on Avira's forums.

    0
×
×
  • Create New...