I need to ask when the number 1 key is pressed, NOT on the Numpad, but the number 1 that is over the Q (trying to make this as clear as possible).
I've been through all the available keys on the Keys array, but no one matches the one that I am looking for.
Is there a way to do this that I'm missing?
My code:
If (currentKeyboardState.IsKeyDown(Keys.1))
Should be the Keys.D1 key. The number keys are D0-D9. The documentation is here.
The documentation says: Used for miscellaneous characters; it can vary by keyboard.
To clarify: Keys.D1 works (e.g. Keys.D[insert number here]).
if (keyState.IsKeyDown(Keys.D4))
{
Console.WriteLine("You pressed the 4 key above E and R!");
}
Related
I have a project model. Projects have a code attribute, which is in AAXXXX-YY format like "AA0001-18", "ZA0012-19", where AA is two characters, XXXX is a progressive number, and YY is the last two digits of the year of its creation.
I need to define a default scope that orders projects by code in a way that the year takes precedence over the other part. Supposing I have the codes "ZZ0001-17", "AA0001-18", and "ZZ002-17", "ZZ001-17" is first, "ZZ002-17" is second, and "AA001-18" is third.
I tried:
default_scope { order(:code) }
but I get "AA001-18" first.
Short answer
order("substring(code from '..$') ASC, code ASC")
Wait but why?
So as you said, you want to basically sort by 2 things:
the last 2 characters in the code string. YY
the rest of the code AAXXXX-
So first things first,
the order function as per Rails documentation will take the arguments you added and use them in the ORDER BY clause of the query.
Then, the substring function according to the documentation of PostgreSQL is:
substring(string from pattern)
If we want 2 characters .. from the end of the string $ we use ..$
Hence, substring(code from '..$')
For more information about pattern matching please refer to the documentation here.
Now finally, with the second part of our ordering the code which already will act as a sorter for all the preceding characters AAXXXX-.
I'm creating an aggregate from a anstime column in a view table in Denodo and I'm using a Cast to convert it to float and it works only for those numbers with period (example 123.123) but does not work for the numbers without period (example 123). Here's my code which only works for those numbers with period:
SELECT row_date,
case
when sum(cast(anstime as float)) is null or sum(cast(anstime as float)) = 0
then 0
else sum(cast(anstime as float))
end as xans
FROM table where anstime like '%.%'
group by row_date
Can someone please help me how to handle those without period?
My guess is you've got values in anstime which are are not numeric, hence why not having the where anstime like '%.%' predicate causes a failure, as has been mentioned in other comments.
You could try adding in an intermediate view before this one which strips out any non numeric values (leaving the decimal point character of course) and this might then allow you to not have to use the where anstime like '%.%' filter.
Perhaps the REGEXP function which would possibly help there
Your where anstime like '%.%' clause is going to restrict possible responses to places where anstime has a period in it. Remove that if you want to allow all values.
I appreciate those who responded to my concern. In the end we had to reach out to our developers to fix the data type of the column from varchar to float rather than doing a workaround.
I am using Neo4J to represent texts; in the simplest case a text is a sequence of words joined by the relationship LEMMA_TEXT.
I am trying to find the Nth word after a known word, with a query that looks something like this.
MATCH (anchor)-[:LEMMA_TEXT*32]->(word)
WHERE id(anchor) = 3275
RETURN word
In one particular case, if I increase the path length to 33, I get this error:
Neo.DatabaseError.Statement.ExecutionFailure: There is no spoon.
And yet the following query returns the correct result.
MATCH (anchor)-[:LEMMA_TEXT*32]->(word)-[:LEMMA_TEXT]->(next)
WHERE id(anchor) = 3275
RETURN next
which demonstrates that the node I want exists and is reachable.
Where is the section of the manual that tells me how to bend the spoon with my mind? More importantly, what does this actually mean?!
If anything breaks at number like 33, it means that there was a restriction upto 32, why 32? 2^5.
It's not trivial that most of the restrictions are in a factor of 2, MongoDB document size cannot be more than 16 MB, on a collection there could be maximum index, no more than 64. etc.
why it works as 32 and then next, because till 32 it can achieve in one operation and for last one it can see the next one as another operation. But it cannot go for 33 in one operation.
Most of these restrictions are basically sanity check though and not really technical boundary.
As for why it is almost always a factor of 2, I want someone else to answer or in other words I don't know.
Have you tried splitting the landing and the search statements in 2?
Plus you should add the label for the text word (forormance)
Example:
MATCH (anchor)
WHERE id(anchor) = 3275
WITH anchor
MATCH (anchor)-[:LEMMA_TEXT*32]->(word)
RETURN word
You get the same error?
I have a table with 1 million+ records that contain names. I would like to be able to sort the list by the first letter in the name.
.. ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
What is the most efficient way to setup the db table to allow for searching by the first character in the table.name field?
The best idea right now is to add an extra field which stores the first character of the name as an observer, index that field and then sort by that field. Problem is it's no longer necessarily alphabetical.
Any suggestions?
You said in a comment:
so lets ignore the first letter part. How can I all records that start with A? All A's no B...z ? Thanks – AnApprentice Feb 21 at 15:30
I issume you meant How can I RETURN all records...
This is the answer:
select * from t
where substr(name, 1, 1) = 'A'
I agree with the questions above as to why you would want to do this -- a regular index on the whole field is functionally equivalent. PostgreSQL (with some new ones in v. 9) has some rather powerful indexing capabilities for special cases which you might want to read about here http://www.postgresql.org/docs/9.1/interactive/sql-createindex.html
I know of:
http://lua-users.org/wiki/SimpleLuaApiExample
It shows me how to build up a table (key, value) pair entry by entry.
Suppose instead, I want to build a gigantic table (say something a 1000 entry table, where both key & value are strings), is there a fast way to do this in lua (rather than 4 func calls per entry:
push
key
value
rawset
What you have written is the fast way to solve this problem. Lua tables are brilliantly engineered, and fast enough that there is no need for some kind of bogus "hint" to say "I expect this table to grow to contain 1000 elements."
For string keys, you can use lua_setfield.
Unfortunately, for associative tables (string keys, non-consecutive-integer keys), no, there is not.
For array-type tables (where the regular 1...N integer indexing is being used), there are some performance-optimized functions, lua_rawgeti and lua_rawseti: http://www.lua.org/pil/27.1.html
You can use createtable to create a table that already has the required number of slots. However, after that, there is no way to do it faster other than
for(int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
lua_push... // key
lua_push... // value
lua_rawset(L, tableindex);
}