|
Thread Rules
1. This is not a "do my homework for me" thread. If you have specific questions, ask, but don't post an assignment or homework problem and expect an exact solution.
2. No recruiting for your cockamamie projects (you won't replace facebook with 3 dudes you found on the internet and $20)
3. If you can't articulate why a language is bad, don't start slinging shit about it. Just remember that nothing is worse than making CSS IE6 compatible.
4. Use [code] tags to format code blocks. |
[C language]
Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input:
Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10]
Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1.
What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess?
|
I can recommend cs101 course in Udacity to beginners(you will use python to build a basic crawler, search engine and pageranker) In school, our homeworks were matrix multiplication, transposing, search algorithms, data structures, multithreading and stuff like that. I did not understand how and when to use them at first. But creating something useful from the bottom up and using those structures to do that is a much more fun approach.
|
On March 04 2013 02:39 Isualin wrote:
I can recommend cs101 course in Udacity to beginners(you will use python to build a basic crawler, search engine and pageranker) In school, our homeworks were matrix multiplication, transposing, search algorithms, data structures, multithreading and stuff like that. I did not understand how and when to use them at first. But creating something useful from the bottom up and using those structures to do that is a much more fun approach.
I'd want to learn python gui programming but I don't want to bother with a web crawler. I can already do that in other languages. That course seems too specific.
I think there's a push for personalized learning right now.
Sorry to hijack.
|
On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority Output in this case should be: If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess?
I think a linked list would work quite well in this case.
|
On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case.
how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x
take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure)
|
On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure)
how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x
..
I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better"
|
On March 04 2013 06:55 LukeNukeEm wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure) how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x .. I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better"
It's as if someone asked what to eat for breakfast and you answered "I think barbed wire would taste quite well". There is no need to explain why it's a bad idea, and you are the one who should feel bad for the terrible suggestion.
|
On March 04 2013 07:04 delHospital wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 06:55 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure) how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x .. I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better" It's as if someone asked what to eat for breakfast and you answered "I think barbed wire would taste quite well". There is no need to explain why it's a bad idea, and you are the one who should feel bad for the terrible suggestion.
I think breakfast is a lot simpler than data structures.
|
Snippet from the output of the prototype primitive messaging system over TCP/IP that I am currently working on:
Hello World!
Hello!
Exception in thread "messaging.Receiver" Exception in thread "messaging.ServerSocketListener" Exception in thread "messaging.Sender" java.lang.Error: java.lang.InterruptedException
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1116)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:603)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:722)
Caused by: java.lang.InterruptedException
at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.reportInterruptAfterWait(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:2017)
at java.util.concurrent.locks.AbstractQueuedSynchronizer$ConditionObject.await(AbstractQueuedSynchronizer.java:2052)
at java.util.concurrent.LinkedBlockingQueue.take(LinkedBlockingQueue.java:442)
at messaging.Sender.run(Sender.java:25)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1110)
... 2 more
java.lang.Error: java.net.SocketException: socket closed
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1116)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:603)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:722)
Caused by: java.net.SocketException: socket closed
at java.net.DualStackPlainSocketImpl.accept0(Native Method)
at java.net.DualStackPlainSocketImpl.socketAccept(DualStackPlainSocketImpl.java:121)
at java.net.AbstractPlainSocketImpl.accept(AbstractPlainSocketImpl.java:398)
at java.net.PlainSocketImpl.accept(PlainSocketImpl.java:183)
at java.net.ServerSocket.implAccept(ServerSocket.java:522)
at java.net.ServerSocket.accept(ServerSocket.java:490)
at messaging.ServerSocketListener.run(ServerSocketListener.java:24)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1110)
... 2 more
java.lang.Error: java.io.EOFException
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1116)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:603)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:722)
Caused by: java.io.EOFException
at java.io.ObjectInputStream$BlockDataInputStream.peekByte(ObjectInputStream.java:2571)
at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readObject0(ObjectInputStream.java:1315)
at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readObject(ObjectInputStream.java:369)
at messaging.Receiver.run(Receiver.java:27)
at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1110)
... 2 more
|
What exactly do you expect us to do with that? You have an exception somewhere in some mysterious code you haven't given us. We're not wizards.
|
On March 04 2013 08:28 tec27 wrote:
What exactly do you expect us to do with that? You have an exception somewhere in some mysterious code you haven't given us. We're not wizards.
He's probably posting it because it's funny. Relax. Not everyone here is looking for help.
|
Yep that's right, it's just for fun.
Also a fun fact: the only way to interrupt a read from a socket's input stream is to close the socket from another thread, and catch the resulting EOFException. It does not react to .interrupt() and thus neither to ExecutorService's shutdownNow().
I'm heading to a java.nio solution asap.
|
On March 04 2013 07:04 delHospital wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 06:55 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure) how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x .. I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better" It's as if someone asked what to eat for breakfast and you answered "I think barbed wire would taste quite well". There is no need to explain why it's a bad idea, and you are the one who should feel bad for the terrible suggestion.
Linked lists (10, to be specific) would actually be a good solution if you only have a small range of possible priorities. Since you only have 10 levels of priority and not an arbitrarily large range, bucket sort becomes your best friend. By using a linked list with head and tail pointers you can completely sidestep the issue of O(n) insertion by just having 10 linked lists, one per priority. You get O(10) worst-case removal, O(10) worst-case insertion. Conversely, a single heap would get you O(log(n)) insertion and removal, which is worse for basically all cases once your data set gets not-tiny.
Things get a bit trickier if this has to support much larger data sets.
But, for this specific problem, don't dismiss the linked list out of hand.
And of course, for the general case of a priority queue with many different levels, a heap is going to be better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_queue#Usual_implementation
|
On March 04 2013 09:10 phar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 07:04 delHospital wrote:On March 04 2013 06:55 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure) how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x .. I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better" It's as if someone asked what to eat for breakfast and you answered "I think barbed wire would taste quite well". There is no need to explain why it's a bad idea, and you are the one who should feel bad for the terrible suggestion. Linked list s (10, to be specific) would actually be a good solution if you only have a small range of possible priorities. Since you only have 10 levels of priority and not an arbitrarily large range, bucket sort becomes your best friend. By using a linked list with head and tail pointers you can completely sidestep the issue of O(n) insertion by just having 10 linked lists, one per priority. You get O(10) worst-case removal, O(10) worst-case insertion. Conversely, a single heap would get you O(log(n)) insertion and removal, which is worse for basically all cases once your data set gets not-tiny. Things get a bit trickier if this has to support much larger data sets. But, for this specific problem, don't dismiss the linked list out of hand. And of course, for the general case of a priority queue with many different levels, a heap is going to be better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_queue#Usual_implementation
BARBED WIRE (yes i am butthurt)
|
how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x
With a finite number of priorities, and a linked list for each, all functions would be constant time.
P.S. phar too fast 
|
On March 04 2013 09:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 09:10 phar wrote:On March 04 2013 07:04 delHospital wrote:On March 04 2013 06:55 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure) how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x .. I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better" It's as if someone asked what to eat for breakfast and you answered "I think barbed wire would taste quite well". There is no need to explain why it's a bad idea, and you are the one who should feel bad for the terrible suggestion. Linked list s (10, to be specific) would actually be a good solution if you only have a small range of possible priorities. Since you only have 10 levels of priority and not an arbitrarily large range, bucket sort becomes your best friend. By using a linked list with head and tail pointers you can completely sidestep the issue of O(n) insertion by just having 10 linked lists, one per priority. You get O(10) worst-case removal, O(10) worst-case insertion. Conversely, a single heap would get you O(log(n)) insertion and removal, which is worse for basically all cases once your data set gets not-tiny. Things get a bit trickier if this has to support much larger data sets. But, for this specific problem, don't dismiss the linked list out of hand. And of course, for the general case of a priority queue with many different levels, a heap is going to be better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_queue#Usual_implementation BARBED WIRE (yes i am butthurt)
What?
|
On March 04 2013 09:29 phar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 09:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 09:10 phar wrote:On March 04 2013 07:04 delHospital wrote:On March 04 2013 06:55 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure) how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x .. I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better" It's as if someone asked what to eat for breakfast and you answered "I think barbed wire would taste quite well". There is no need to explain why it's a bad idea, and you are the one who should feel bad for the terrible suggestion. Linked list s (10, to be specific) would actually be a good solution if you only have a small range of possible priorities. Since you only have 10 levels of priority and not an arbitrarily large range, bucket sort becomes your best friend. By using a linked list with head and tail pointers you can completely sidestep the issue of O(n) insertion by just having 10 linked lists, one per priority. You get O(10) worst-case removal, O(10) worst-case insertion. Conversely, a single heap would get you O(log(n)) insertion and removal, which is worse for basically all cases once your data set gets not-tiny. Things get a bit trickier if this has to support much larger data sets. But, for this specific problem, don't dismiss the linked list out of hand. And of course, for the general case of a priority queue with many different levels, a heap is going to be better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_queue#Usual_implementation BARBED WIRE (yes i am butthurt) What?
HE SAID: BARBED WIRE (YES IM BUTTHURT)
It has to do with the discussion earlier in your quote.
Btw I am increasingly afraid of the effects of torrenting. I don't know where else to ask. Yahoo answers isn't techy enough and stackoverflow would probably not condone this kind of information.
If someone were to do it, what benefits does being behind a vpn provide?
Is my download speed slower? Due to encryption.
Will bandwith throttling still occur? ISP finds out you are uploading a lot and therefore caps your download speed or delivers bad ping.
VPNs seem expensive so I'm reluctant to get one and would like to ask the quick question in case anyone knows.
|
On March 04 2013 11:58 obesechicken13 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 09:29 phar wrote:On March 04 2013 09:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 09:10 phar wrote:On March 04 2013 07:04 delHospital wrote:On March 04 2013 06:55 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:[C language] Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input: Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10] Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
Insert 10000 3
Insert 19444 9
Pop
Insert 10331 3
Pop
Pop
Pop
Output in this case should be:
19444 [comment: highest priority]
10000
103331
-1
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1. What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess? I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure) how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x .. I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better" It's as if someone asked what to eat for breakfast and you answered "I think barbed wire would taste quite well". There is no need to explain why it's a bad idea, and you are the one who should feel bad for the terrible suggestion. Linked list s (10, to be specific) would actually be a good solution if you only have a small range of possible priorities. Since you only have 10 levels of priority and not an arbitrarily large range, bucket sort becomes your best friend. By using a linked list with head and tail pointers you can completely sidestep the issue of O(n) insertion by just having 10 linked lists, one per priority. You get O(10) worst-case removal, O(10) worst-case insertion. Conversely, a single heap would get you O(log(n)) insertion and removal, which is worse for basically all cases once your data set gets not-tiny. Things get a bit trickier if this has to support much larger data sets. But, for this specific problem, don't dismiss the linked list out of hand. And of course, for the general case of a priority queue with many different levels, a heap is going to be better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_queue#Usual_implementation BARBED WIRE (yes i am butthurt) What? HE SAID: BARBED WIRE (YES IM BUTTHURT)It has to do with the discussion earlier in your quote. Btw I am increasingly afraid of the effects of torrenting. I don't know where else to ask. Yahoo answers isn't techy enough and stackoverflow would probably not condone this kind of information. If someone were to do it, what benefits does being behind a vpn provide? Is my download speed slower? Due to encryption. Will bandwith throttling still occur? ISP finds out you are uploading a lot and therefore caps your download speed or delivers bad ping. VPNs seem expensive so I'm reluctant to get one and would like to ask the quick question in case anyone knows.
Oh sorry, I didn't read the earlier stuff, just read the question and scanned to see linked list & heap specified. Didn't read anything else too carefully.
Your own question wasn't exactly super clear. Also it has nothing to do with programming, you may want to ask that in the tech support section and people may know more. As an aside, all a VPN does is securely transmit all your data to another network before going out to the rest of the internet to serve whatever requests you're doing. It doesn't reduce the amount of bandwidth in any way.
|
On March 04 2013 13:04 phar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 04 2013 11:58 obesechicken13 wrote:On March 04 2013 09:29 phar wrote:On March 04 2013 09:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 09:10 phar wrote:On March 04 2013 07:04 delHospital wrote:On March 04 2013 06:55 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 06:20 MisterD wrote:On March 04 2013 05:22 LukeNukeEm wrote:On March 04 2013 02:22 darkness wrote:
[C language]
Okay, so I'm asked to implement a priority queue with time and memory efficiency in mind. Here's a sample of what the program should take as input:
Insert [number, 10000-19999] [priority; 1-10]
Pop <------- to print an available number with the highest priority
[quote]
Output in this case should be:
[quote]
If there's nothing on queue despite using pop, then print -1.
What should I use to achieve this? C structures? Stack but it might not be good I guess?
I think a linked list would work quite well in this case. how is a linked list a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heap_(data_structure) how is a heap a good idea to implement a priority queue x.x .. I realize that you are right, but please post reasoning the next time instead of just writing "your solution is shit. mine is better" It's as if someone asked what to eat for breakfast and you answered "I think barbed wire would taste quite well". There is no need to explain why it's a bad idea, and you are the one who should feel bad for the terrible suggestion. Linked list s (10, to be specific) would actually be a good solution if you only have a small range of possible priorities. Since you only have 10 levels of priority and not an arbitrarily large range, bucket sort becomes your best friend. By using a linked list with head and tail pointers you can completely sidestep the issue of O(n) insertion by just having 10 linked lists, one per priority. You get O(10) worst-case removal, O(10) worst-case insertion. Conversely, a single heap would get you O(log(n)) insertion and removal, which is worse for basically all cases once your data set gets not-tiny. Things get a bit trickier if this has to support much larger data sets. But, for this specific problem, don't dismiss the linked list out of hand. And of course, for the general case of a priority queue with many different levels, a heap is going to be better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priority_queue#Usual_implementation BARBED WIRE (yes i am butthurt) What? HE SAID: BARBED WIRE (YES IM BUTTHURT)It has to do with the discussion earlier in your quote. Btw I am increasingly afraid of the effects of torrenting. I don't know where else to ask. Yahoo answers isn't techy enough and stackoverflow would probably not condone this kind of information. If someone were to do it, what benefits does being behind a vpn provide? Is my download speed slower? Due to encryption. Will bandwith throttling still occur? ISP finds out you are uploading a lot and therefore caps your download speed or delivers bad ping. VPNs seem expensive so I'm reluctant to get one and would like to ask the quick question in case anyone knows. Oh sorry, I didn't read the earlier stuff, just read the question and scanned to see linked list & heap specified. Didn't read anything else too carefully. Your own question wasn't exactly super clear. Also it has nothing to do with programming, you may want to ask that in the tech support section and people may know more. As an aside, all a VPN does is securely transmit all your data to another network before going out to the rest of the internet to serve whatever requests you're doing. It doesn't reduce the amount of bandwidth in any way.
Ah good point. I will ask there.
|
to any web devs: is it okay to be coding just html and vanilla js code in this day and age.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
