I´m trying to substract two hours.
QString 1 = "11:00";
QString 2 = "10:00";
I would like to save the result from (11:00 - 10:00) into another QString.
Does anyone know how could I do this?
Thanks for replying!
I would use QTime:
Convert your QStrings to QTime:
QTime a = QTime::fromString("11:00", "HH:mm");
QTime b = QTime::fromString("12:00", "HH:mm");
Get difference in msecs:
int differenceInMsecs = a.msecsTo(b);
(Read QTime:msecsTo() documentation!)
Convert msecs ins whatever you want and put it in QString
Related
I am trying to convert my time watched in a Netflix show to a float so I can total it up. I cannot figure out how to convert it. I have tried many ways, including:
temp['Minutes'] = temp['Duration'].apply(lambda x: float(x))
Error: ValueError: could not convert string to float: '00:54:45'
''' 2022-05-18 05:21:42 00:54:45 NaN Ozark: Season 4: Mud (Episode 13)
NaN Amazon FTVET31DOVI2020 Smart TV 00:54:50 00:54:50 US (United
States) Wednesday 2022-05-18
'''
I have pulled the day of week and Day out but I would like to plot it just for fun and think the minutes would be the best to add up over time.
Do it like this:
var = '00:54:45'
var_array = var.split(':')
float = float(var_array[1]) + (float(var_array[2])/60)
print(float)
Output: 54.75 (from here u can round the second part, since it's a plus it wouldn't affect the first term)
I have to deal with very big data (Point clouds generally more than 30 000 000 points) using Matlab. I can read ascii data using textscan function. After reading, I need to detect invalid data (points with 0,0,0 coordinates) and then I need to do some mathematical operations on each point or each line in the data. In my way, first I read data with textscan and then I assign this data to a matrix. Secondly, I use for loops for detecting invalid points and doing some mathematical operations on each point or line in the data. A sample of my code is shown as below. According to profile tool of Matlab textscan takes 37% and line
transformed_list((i:i),(1:4)) = coordinate_list((i:i),(1:4))*t_matrix;
takes 35% of all computation time.
I tried it with another point cloud (stores around 5 500 000) and profile tool reported same results. Is there a way of avoiding for loops, or is there another way of speeding up this computation?
fileID = fopen('C:\Users\Mustafa\Desktop\ptx_all_data\dede5.ptx');
original_data = textscan(fileID,'%f %f %f %f %f %f %f', 'delimiter',' ');
fclose(fileID);
column = original_data{1}(1);
row = original_data{1}(2);
t_matrix = [original_data{1}(7) original_data{2}(7) original_data{3}(7) original_data{4}(7)
original_data{1}(8) original_data{2}(8) original_data{3}(8) original_data{4}(8)
original_data{1}(9) original_data{2}(9) original_data{3}(9) original_data{4}(9)
original_data{1}(10) original_data{2}(10) original_data{3}(10) original_data{4}(10)];
coordinate_list(:,1) = original_data{1}(11:length(original_data{1}));
coordinate_list(:,2) = original_data{2}(11:length(original_data{2}));
coordinate_list(:,3) = original_data{3}(11:length(original_data{3}));
coordinate_list(:,4) = 0;
coordinate_list(:,5) = original_data{4}(11:length(original_data{4}));
transformed_list = zeros(length(coordinate_list),5);
for i = 1:length(coordinate_list)
if coordinate_list(i,1) == 0 && coordinate_list(i,2) == 0 && coordinate_list(i,3) == 0
transformed_list(i,:) = NaN;
else
%transformed_list(i,:) = coordinate_list(i,:)*t_matrix;
transformed_list((i:i),(1:4)) = coordinate_list((i:i),(1:4))*t_matrix;
transformed_list(i,5) = coordinate_list(i,5);
end
%i
end
Thanks in advance
for loops with conditional statements like those will take ages to run. But what Matlab lacks in loop speed it makes up with vectorization and indexing.
Let's try some logical indexing like this to solve the first step:
coordinate_list(coordinate_list(:,1) == 0 .* ...
coordinate_list(:,2) == 0 .* ...
coordinate_list(:,3) == 0)=nan;
And then vectorize the second statement:
transformed_list(:,(1:4)) = coordinate_list(:,(1:4))*t_matrix;
As EBH mentioned above this might be a bit heavy on your RAM. If it's more than your computer can handle asks yourself if the coordinates really have to be doubles, maybe single precision will do. If that still doesn't do, try slicing the vector and performing the operation in parts.
Small example to give you an idea because I had a 2million element point cloud around here:
In R2015a
transformed_list = zeros(length(coordinate_list),5);
tic
for i = 1:length(coordinate_list)
if coordinate_list(i,1) == 0 && coordinate_list(i,2) == 0 && coordinate_list(i,3) == 0
transformed_list(i,:) = NaN;
else
%transformed_list(i,:) = coordinate_list(i,:)*t_matrix;
transformed_list((i:i),(1:3)) = coordinate_list((i:i),(1:3))*t_matrix;
transformed_list(i,5) = 1;
end
%i
end
toc
Returns Elapsed time is 10.928142 seconds.
transformed_list=coordinate_list;
tic
coordinate_list(coordinate_list(:,1) == 0 .* ...
coordinate_list(:,2) == 0 .* ...
coordinate_list(:,3) == 0)=nan;
transformed_list(:,(1:3)) = coordinate_list(:,(1:3))*t_matrix;
toc
Returns Elapsed time is 0.101696 seconds.
Rather than read the whole file, you'd be better off using a loop with
fscanf(fileID, '%f', 7)
and processing input as you read it.
I am looking for a way to find duplicate images using AutoIt. I've looked into PixelSearch and SearchImage but neither do exactly what I need them to do.
I am trying to compare 2 images by filename and see if they are the same image (a duplicate). The best way I've thought to do it would be to:
1) Get both image sizes in pixels
2) Use a while loop to get the color of each pixel and store it in an array
3) Check to see if both arrays are equal to each other.
Does anybody have any ideas on how to achieve this?
I just did some more research on this subject and built a small UDF based on a few answers I read. (Mainly based off of monoceres's answer on AutoItScript.com). I figured I would post my solution here to help any future developers!
CompareImagesUDF.au3
Func _CompareImages($ciImageOne, $ciImageTwo)
_GDIPlus_Startup()
$fname1=$ciImageOne
If $fname1="" Then Exit
$fname2=$ciImageTwo
If $fname2="" Then Exit
$bm1 = _GDIPlus_ImageLoadFromFile($fname1)
$bm2 = _GDIPlus_ImageLoadFromFile($fname2)
; MsgBox(0, "bm1==bm2", CompareBitmaps($bm1, $bm2))
Return CompareBitmaps($bm1, $bm2)
_GDIPlus_ImageDispose($bm1)
_GDIPlus_ImageDispose($bm2)
_GDIPlus_Shutdown()
EndFunc
Func CompareBitmaps($bm1, $bm2)
$Bm1W = _GDIPlus_ImageGetWidth($bm1)
$Bm1H = _GDIPlus_ImageGetHeight($bm1)
$BitmapData1 = _GDIPlus_BitmapLockBits($bm1, 0, 0, $Bm1W, $Bm1H, $GDIP_ILMREAD, $GDIP_PXF32RGB)
$Stride = DllStructGetData($BitmapData1, "Stride")
$Scan0 = DllStructGetData($BitmapData1, "Scan0")
$ptr1 = $Scan0
$size1 = ($Bm1H - 1) * $Stride + ($Bm1W - 1) * 4
$Bm2W = _GDIPlus_ImageGetWidth($bm2)
$Bm2H = _GDIPlus_ImageGetHeight($bm2)
$BitmapData2 = _GDIPlus_BitmapLockBits($bm2, 0, 0, $Bm2W, $Bm2H, $GDIP_ILMREAD, $GDIP_PXF32RGB)
$Stride = DllStructGetData($BitmapData2, "Stride")
$Scan0 = DllStructGetData($BitmapData2, "Scan0")
$ptr2 = $Scan0
$size2 = ($Bm2H - 1) * $Stride + ($Bm2W - 1) * 4
$smallest = $size1
If $size2 < $smallest Then $smallest = $size2
$call = DllCall("msvcrt.dll", "int:cdecl", "memcmp", "ptr", $ptr1, "ptr", $ptr2, "int", $smallest)
_GDIPlus_BitmapUnlockBits($bm1, $BitmapData1)
_GDIPlus_BitmapUnlockBits($bm2, $BitmapData2)
Return ($call[0]=0)
EndFunc ;==>CompareBitmaps
Now to compare imagages, all you have to do is include the CompareImagesUDF.au3 file and call the function.
CompareImagesExample.au3
#Include "CompareImagesUDF.au3"
; Define the two images (They can be different file formats)
$img1 = "Image1.jpg"
$img2 = "Image2.jpg"
; Compare the two images
$duplicateCheck = _CompareImages($img1, $img2)
MsgBox(0,"Is Duplicate?", $duplicateCheck)
If you want to find out if both images are an exact match, regardless if names are the same or different, use the built-in Crypt function _Crypt_HashFile with MD2 or MD5 to make a hash of both files and compare that.
I am currently runnuing training in matlab on a matrix of logspecrum samples I am constantly dealing with underflow problems.I understood that I need to work with log's in order to deal with underflowing.
I am still strugling with uderflow though , when i calculate the mean (mue) bucause it is negetive i cant work with logs so i need the real values that underflow.
These are equasions i am working with:
In MATLAB code i calulate log_tau in oreder avoid underflow but when calulating mue i need exp(log(tau)) which goes to zero.
I am attaching relevent MATLAB code
**in the code i called the variable alpha is tau ...
for i = 1 : 50
log_c = Logsum(log_alpha,1) - log(N);
c = exp(log_c);
mue = DataMat*alpha./(repmat(exp(Logsum(log_alpha,1)),FrameSize,1));
log_abs_mue = log(abs(mue));
log_SigmaSqr = log((DataMat.^2)*alpha) - repmat(Logsum(log_alpha,1),FrameSize,1) - 2*log_abs_mue;
SigmaSqr = exp(log_SigmaSqr);
for j=1:N
rep_DataMat(:,:,j) = repmat(DataMat(:,j),1,M);
log_gamma(j,:) = log_c - 0.5*(FrameSize*log(2*pi)+sum(log_SigmaSqr)) + sum((rep_DataMat(:,:,j) - mue).^2./(2*SigmaSqr));
end
log_alpha = log_gamma - repmat(Logsum(log_gamma,2),1,M);
alpha = exp(log_alpha);
end
c = exp(log_c);
SigmaSqr = exp(log_SigmaSqr);
does any one see how i can avoid this? or what needs to be fixed in code?
What i did was add this line to the MATLAB code:
mue(isnan(mue))=0; %fix 0/0 problem
and this one:
SigmaSqr(SigmaSqr==0)=1;%fix if mue_k = x_k
not sure if this is the best solution but is seems to work...
any have a better idea?
I'm trying to convert an int into a byte in Processing 1.0.9.
This is the snippet of code that I have been working with:
byte xByte = byte(mouseX);
byte yByte = byte(mouseY);
byte setFirst = byte(128);
byte resetFirst = byte(127);
xByte = xByte | setFirst;
yByte = yByte >> 1;
port.write(xByte);
port.write(yByte);
According to the Processing API, this should work, but I keep getting an error at xByte = xByte | setFirst; that says:
cannot convert from int to byte
I have tried converting 128 and 127 to they respective hex values (0x80 and 0x7F), but that didn't work either. I have tried everything mentioned in the API as well as some other blogs, but I feel like I'm missing something very trivial.
I would appreciate any help.
Thank you.
I've never used Processing before, but it's possible the | operator returns an integer regardless of the arguments' types. Try changing the problematic line to
xByte = byte(xByte | setFirst);