Oh right. Thanks for the reply.
Spencer
2008/12/10 Peter Bienstman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On Wednesday 10 December 2008 03:10:51 Spencer wrote:
> > I've got a couple of suggestions for Mnemosyne.
> >
> > I have read on the newsgroup that an 'undo' feature would be a big
> > job, so instead of t
On Wednesday 10 December 2008 03:10:51 Spencer wrote:
> I’ve got a couple of suggestions for Mnemosyne.
>
> I have read on the newsgroup that an ‘undo’ feature would be a big
> job, so instead of that what about a feature that allows you to call
> up a particular card and redo it? That way, suppos
I’ve got a couple of suggestions for Mnemosyne.
I have read on the newsgroup that an ‘undo’ feature would be a big
job, so instead of that what about a feature that allows you to call
up a particular card and redo it? That way, supposing you grade a card
incorrectly, you could go straight to the
On Tuesday 09 December 2008 20:32:54 rinmanb70 wrote:
> I may (must?) have done something wrong, but I imported about 25 cards
> from a "text with tab separated Q/A" file and it will only show 5 of
> them. I've tried everything I could think of, and I cannot find any
> documentation on this probl
On Tuesday 09 December 2008 20:22:56 Łukasz Różycki wrote:
> However it doesn't explain why deleting cards takes so much
> time.
That is because the listview widget is so slow. Switching to model-view should
be the answer there.
Peter
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You r
I may (must?) have done something wrong, but I imported about 25 cards
from a "text with tab separated Q/A" file and it will only show 5 of
them. I've tried everything I could think of, and I cannot find any
documentation on this problem. How can get it show them all?
--~--~-~--~~---
2008/12/9 duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Without even looking at the code I am almost sure that the import algorithm,
> as it stands, must perform a scan of all previously imported items,
> for each imported item that would explain the O(nsquared)
> behaviour. If that's not the case something s
2008/12/9 duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> But it is often the case that you can make a good guess at what is
> going wrong when what should be a fast operation is very slow. If you
> see that it is fast for a small n but very slow for a somewhat larger
> n, and if it looks like the algorithm is not l
On Dec 9, 8:44 am, "Oisín Mac Fhearaí" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this assumption should be tested rather than... well, assumed
> :) O(n^2) isn't all that bad really; in this case, it could very well
> just be that the xml parsing bottleneck is a relatively large constant
> (usually i
> What matters for the analysis is only the actual intervals, and not by which
> algorithm they were defined.
Ah, now I'm not "illegal", hiding in the shadows. Thank you.
So, multiple algorithm plugins for 2.0 won't interfere with your
research!
There is great value in proof-of-effectiveness, and
Not being a competent programmer, I think I won't post code here.
(You know I can't be certain that I haven't introduced bugs.)
But, I intend to submit some proper plugin algorithms when that
becomes possible.
On Dec 6, 4:11 pm, "Jason Axelson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> querido,
> I am also i
2008/12/9 duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It does sound like the increase in time
> with number of items is greater than linear, and if that's the case
> there is probably only one spot that needs to be fixed. If this is
> inherent in the xml parser you're using I would consider it a bug in
> that li
On Tuesday 09 December 2008 14:00:13 duncan wrote:
> I'll patch this. I wouldn't have cracked on it as hard as I did if I
> weren't planning on it, actually. I tend to think you should only be
> really critical of (free) software you are willing to help improve. I
> do have a question though. It
On Dec 9, 2:53 am, Peter Bienstman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A big speedup could already be gained by switching from the old xml parser
> that was included with Python to one of the more modern variants that comes
> with the python library (Ixml I think, but I don't remember exactly)
>
> Patc
14 matches
Mail list logo
