operations

myBatis连接MySQL报错误：No operations allowed after connection closed.Connection was i www.MyException.Cn 发布于：2013-07-16 22:38:05 浏览：253次 0 myBatis连接MySQL报异常：No operations allowed after connection closed.Connection was i myBatis连接MySQL报异常：No operations allowed after connection closed.Connection was implicitly closed 异常信息 ? org.hibernate.exception.JDBCConnectionException: could not execute query at org.hibernate.exception.SQLStateConverter.convert(SQLStateConverter.java:74) at org.hibernate.exception.JDBCExceptionHelper.convert(JDBCExceptionHelper.java:43) ....... Caused by: com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions

I am looking at solution for the set bit count problem (given a binary number, how to efficiently count how many bits are set). Here, http://graphics.stanford.edu/~seander/bithacks.html#CountBitsSetNaive , I have found some methods. What about the lookup table method? I dont understand what properties of binary representation / number make it work. static const unsigned char BitsSetTable256[256] = { # define B2(n) n, n+1, n+1, n+2 # define B4(n) B2(n), B2(n+1), B2(n+1), B2(n+2) # define B6(n) B4(n), B4(n+1), B4(n+1), B4(n+2) B6(0), B6(1), B6(1), B6(2) }; unsigned int v; // count the number of

I'm trying to check whether or not a number has the second bit flag (ie 0000 0010). My code is as follows: int flags = Integer.parseInt(fields[1]); String strflags = Integer.toBinaryString(flags); flags = Integer.parseInt(strflags); int secondBitTest = Integer.parseInt("00000010", 2); if((flags & secondBitTest) == 2) { System.out.println("YES"); } However I think I might be doing this wrong, since when I try to input 147 nothing is returned. You can check if any bit is set using this code that I found here . if (x & (1<<n) != 0) { //n-th bit is set } else { //n-th bit is not set } x is the

I've a code alike void ExecuteTraced(Action a, string message) { TraceOpStart(message); a(); TraceOpEnd(message); } The callback (a) could call ExecuteTraced again, and, in some cases, asynchronously (via ThreadPool, BeginInvoke, PLINQ etc, so I've no ability to explicitly mark operation scope). I want to trace all operation nested (even if they perform asynchronously). So, I need the ability to get last traced operation inside logical call context (there may be a lot of concurrent threads, so it's impossible to use lastTraced static field). There're CallContext.LogicalGetData and CallContext

I have created a simple calculator that calculates two inputs (ex. 2 + 2 = 4). What I want to do now is to make the app to calculate multiple operations like (ex. 2 + 2 * 4 - 1 = 15). Can someone help me with my code? Here is my code. public class MainActivity extends Activity { public String str =""; Character op = 'q'; int i,num,numtemp; EditText showResult; String displayStr = ""; @Override public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) { super.onCreate(savedInstanceState); setContentView(R.layout.activity_main); this.getWindow().setSoftInputMode(WindowManager.LayoutParams.SOFT_INPUT_STATE

I have a bunch of code to find the primitive operations for. The thing is that there aren't really many detailed resources out on the web on the subject. In this loop: for i:=0 to n do print test end How many steps do we really have? In my first guess I would say n+1 considering n for the times looping and 1 for the print. Then I thought that maybe I am not precise enough. Isn't there an operation even to add 1 to i in every loop? In that matter we have n+n+1=2n+1. Is that correct? The loop can be broken down into its "primitive operations" by re-casting it as a while : int i = 0; while (i < n

Suppose i have list of numbers [3, 51, 34] . I want to add to each element the sum of the previous elements and return a new list with these new values. So here the result would be [3, 54, 88] . How to do it in general on an arbitrary-sized input list? The last line of this code should work on the known size lists. indices1 = range(len(list1)) indices1.sort(key=lambda x: list2[x]) list1 = map(lambda i: list1[i], indices1) labelled = zip(list1, ascii_uppercase) sorted_data = sorted(labelled, key=itemgetter(0)) labels = [pair[1] for pair in sorted_data] newlist, = [ 0, list1[0], list1[1] + list1

The anyMatch operation will return true if it finds an element - the noneMatch operation will return false it if finds a matching element. The anyMatch operation will return false if it finds no matching element - the noneMatch operation will return true if finds no matching element. Therefore, instead of having both of these operations, could we not just do with one, or am I missing something? In essence, anyMatch returning false is a way of evaluating the truth of noneMatch's predicate. Same reason you have a != b , instead of only supporting ! (a == b) : Easy of use. Clarity of purpose. Yes