This is in a separate reply because there's a possibility that the thread might be split.

A "hash code" is what you get when you run something through a "hashing algorithm." A "hashing algorithm" is, quite simply, one that takes an input and returns an integer as output.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_function

oh ok - that's for the BOX. how is the ARROW animation done?

Probably by manipulating the arrow's CSS positioning properties.

After all our discussions, you still haven't learned to use google before asking a question? Try it on this one, and you'll see some very useful, transparently accessible stuff at the top of the search page.

resetreset,

Let me try to rephrase that more politely:
Did you try "hash code" in:

1. Google:
   http://www.google.com/search?q="hash code"
2. Google Linux:
   http://www.google.com/linux?q="hash code"
3. Wikipedia®
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_code

If so, do you have specific questions to clarify what you found?

I did look at all 3, & I think Wikipedia® probably is your answer, but I'm not sure.

BTW, I usually find regular Google the least helpful of the 3, & Wikipedia®, even for Linux questions, the best. (As we say in Texas, go figure.)

I've noticed a pattern in resetreset's threads: every time someone points out that he needs to change his approach or attitude, a mod shows up. Here is another example. Resetreset, if you're hitting the report button every time someone points out that you're approaching things the wrong way, then you are approaching things the wrong way.

resetreset,

Let me try to rephrase that more politely:
Did you try "hash code" in:

1. Google:
   http://www.google.com/search?q="hash code"
2. Google Linux:
   http://www.google.com/linux?q="hash code"
3. Wikipedia®
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_code

If so, do you have specific questions to clarify what you found?
Was my earlier "... it's an optimized way of finding symbols in a symbol table." not sufficient?

I did look at all 3, & I think Wikipedia® probably is your answer, but I'm not sure.


BTW, I usually find regular Google the least helpful of the 3, & Wikipedia®, even for Linux questions, the best. (As we say in Texas, go figure.)

1 members found this post helpful.

no no, I already read the Wikipedia page. So what's "hash code" then? The number it generates by DOING the hashing? That's what it should be, I guess....?

Eh? I've never reported anyone in my life!
I don't LIKE to Google, because I do it about 99 billion times a day, and I hate looking at that machine generated page to find out which page is the most relevant. I prefer to TALK to people and pick up stuff that way, and that's what this lovely site facilitates. A search engine will never replace a human!

I usually try Wikipedia first. It usually works quite well for me, except when it has no entry at all. When I made my ... um, less polite suggestion, I was comforted by the knowledge that, at least when I searched, the wikipedia article was the very first one on the search results.

archtoad6, your second suggestion (http://www.google.com/linux?q="hash code") was an alternative I wasn't even aware of. Thank you.

1 members found this post helpful.

Actually, I believe this to be true.
resetreset, I admire the warmth of those words. It turns out, though, that there's a reason that LQ encourages you to search first before asking questions. The reason is that those who give answers also have other ways they could be spending their time. They can optimize use of their time if those who ask questions have made a decent effort of finding the answers on their own. See how that works?

The worst thing you could do, in my opinion, would be to admit publicly, as you have done here, that you prefer the human touch to the extent that you don't do your own research first. This risks making others less likely to help you in the future. Not because they're unfriendly, just because they have other things on their plate. They don't necessarily participate in LQ with one eye on the clock, but if you could focust on the mental picture of them doing that, it might help you.

Just sayin'.

1 members found this post helpful.

A very bad example. The only moderator participating in that thread wasn't reacting to anything anyone else had said; he was reacting only to resetreset's comments, and wasn't even particularly superpolite in his responses. There's no way that he could have been called to that thread by anyone reporting the thread, because the moderator's first participation was as post #2. So nobody went crying to the mods here.

Point taken, wje_lq. Resetreset, please allow me to withdraw my accusation and apologize to you.

*Holds out hand with palm up

We've all come to hasty conclusions from time to time. I think LQ needs an icon for "holds out hand with palm up". Not that the icons don't offend my sense of tradition. ;)

1 members found this post helpful.

I believe so.

Comments
If you had added that to your 1st post, ideally including a link to the Wikipedia® page, this thread might have been over in about 3 or 4 posts.

Beautifully put wje_lq , I may steal some of those words someday to make a personal canned response or quote you in a blog entry.

resetreset,
Think about them, his words accurately/eloquently capture how we would like LQ to work. BTW, have you ever read How To Ask Questions the Smart Way?

Obviously we have different preferences. -- I have to admit that I prefer to speak rather than type, so I my answer finding may involve a phone call to a friend. I am lucky to be one of the leaders of the most active LUG* in the world, so I have a circle of Linux experts only a phone call away. Personally, however, I would rather type good search terms into the right engine, than compose a Raymond & Moen compliant "Good Question" for LQ.

I agree, that's why I don't go to Google 1st, not for Linux questions. Here is my list of external search engines in order of preference:

1. Wikipedia®
2. Google Linux
3. Google

Of course I check LQ Search, too.

While posting w/o searching is not against the rules, one** might make a case that posting w/o searching LQ is against their spirit:
"* Do not post the same discussion in more than one forum. Duplicate discussions can be frustrating for other members. ..."
If you don't search LQ, you might easily ask a question that has already been answered.


wje_lq,
You're welcome. BTW, I always add Google Linux my primary browsers' (Konqueror & Opera) address entry dialog shortcuts.

Also, thank you for gracefully accepting what I intended as gentle guidance -- I was afraid I didn't get the words right.


dugan,
Thanks for making that polite apology. This might have turned into a flame war, instead maturity has prevailed.


Footnotes
*HLUG (Houston, TX) -- we have 13 meetings per month, most LUGs are lucky to have that many per year. I'm sure we're not the largest or best organized, but I firmly believe we are the most active in terms of number of meetings.

** "one" to indicate that this argument is logically possible, but not necessarily my own opinion, let alone LQ policy.