set

问题 I am trying to write a batch script that saves the result of a command in a variable. so I can use it later. For example I am tryin to run this on the script: sc queryex "Service" |find /i "pid" but I want to save this result in a variable. set PIDRS=sc queryex "Themes" |find /i "pid" ECHO "%PIDRS% Any Ideas? 回答1: for /f "tokens=* delims=" %%# in ('sc queryex "Themes" ^|find /i "pid"') do set "PIDRS=%%#" echo %PIDRS% This will set the entire line to PIDRS here's how to get only the pid: @echo

问题 My question is, how can we apply intersection for 5~7 sets. Suppose each set having set of elements. please help me in creating an algorithm for this and what will be the complexity of this process. 回答1: A straight forward method: I = S_1; For each set s in S_2 ... S_N: For each element ei in I: if ei not in s remove ei from I endif endfor endfor With this the complexity is m^2xN if each set has m elements and there are N sets. If sets are sorted then you can have mlog(m)N with binary search

问题 My question is, how can we apply intersection for 5~7 sets. Suppose each set having set of elements. please help me in creating an algorithm for this and what will be the complexity of this process. 回答1: A straight forward method: I = S_1; For each set s in S_2 ... S_N: For each element ei in I: if ei not in s remove ei from I endif endfor endfor With this the complexity is m^2xN if each set has m elements and there are N sets. If sets are sorted then you can have mlog(m)N with binary search

问题 My question is, how can we apply intersection for 5~7 sets. Suppose each set having set of elements. please help me in creating an algorithm for this and what will be the complexity of this process. 回答1: A straight forward method: I = S_1; For each set s in S_2 ... S_N: For each element ei in I: if ei not in s remove ei from I endif endfor endfor With this the complexity is m^2xN if each set has m elements and there are N sets. If sets are sorted then you can have mlog(m)N with binary search

问题 This is the most crazy thing I have seen in java (1.6): Set<ActionPlan> actionPlans = assessment.getActionPlans(); //getActionPlans() returns a java.util.HashSet<ActionPlan> ActionPlan actionPlan = actionPlans.iterator().next(); assertTrue(actionPlan1.equals(actionPlan)); assertEquals(actionPlan1.hashCode(), actionPlan.hashCode()); assertTrue(actionPlans.contains(actionPlan1)); The first two asserts pass but the last one fails. I'm not giving you details on the ActionPlan and Assessment

问题 This is the most crazy thing I have seen in java (1.6): Set<ActionPlan> actionPlans = assessment.getActionPlans(); //getActionPlans() returns a java.util.HashSet<ActionPlan> ActionPlan actionPlan = actionPlans.iterator().next(); assertTrue(actionPlan1.equals(actionPlan)); assertEquals(actionPlan1.hashCode(), actionPlan.hashCode()); assertTrue(actionPlans.contains(actionPlan1)); The first two asserts pass but the last one fails. I'm not giving you details on the ActionPlan and Assessment

问题 I tried to make manual currency. Here is my code DecimalFormat df = new DecimalFormat(); DecimalFormatSymbols dfs = new DecimalFormatSymbols(); dfs.setCurrencySymbol("$"); dfs.setGroupingSeparator('.'); dfs.setDecimalSeparator('.'); df.setDecimalFormatSymbols(dfs); System.out.println(df.format(3333454)); Program output is 3.333.454 Why the currency symbol I set didn't appear? 回答1: Try this: NumberFormat df = NumberFormat.getCurrencyInstance(); DecimalFormatSymbols dfs = new

问题 I have this simple piece of code: #include <iostream> #include <set> using std::set; int main(int argc, char argv) { set<int> myset; set<int>::iterator it_l, it_u; myset.insert(10); it_l = myset.lower_bound(11); it_u = myset.upper_bound(9); std::cout << *it_l << " " << *it_u << std::endl; } This prints 1 as lower bound for 11, and 10 as upper bound for 9. I don't understand why 1 is printed. I was hoping to use these two methods to get a range of values for given upper bound / lower bound.

问题 I have this simple piece of code: #include <iostream> #include <set> using std::set; int main(int argc, char argv) { set<int> myset; set<int>::iterator it_l, it_u; myset.insert(10); it_l = myset.lower_bound(11); it_u = myset.upper_bound(9); std::cout << *it_l << " " << *it_u << std::endl; } This prints 1 as lower bound for 11, and 10 as upper bound for 9. I don't understand why 1 is printed. I was hoping to use these two methods to get a range of values for given upper bound / lower bound.

问题 I'm quite new at Coq and trying to develop a framework based on my research. My work is quite definition-heavy and I'm having trouble encoding it because of how Coq seems to treat sets. There are Type and Set , which they call 'sorts', and I can use them to define a new set: Variable X: Type. And then there's a library encoding (sub)sets as 'Ensembles', which are functions from some Type to a Prop . In other words, they are predicates on a Type : Variable Y: Ensemble X. Ensemble s feel more