Please can anyone help me how to implement this effect in the text. Kindly help me with this. I have been trying but I can't get it to work.
I want a single word embedded in whole logo. How do i do it in adobe illustrator?  I want to design a logo like this. Kindly help me
In any finite graph with at least two vertices, there must be two vertices with the same degree TeX capacity exceeded with glossary package My document contains many thousands of glossary items. When compiling with XeLaTeX, about 1/8 of the way through the document, it reports:  ! TeX capacity exceeded, sorry [main memory size=3000000]. \@glolist@ ...},{13586},{9406},{4539},{12811},{179                                                   51},{5831},{1047},{14948},    The numbers you see above are ones placed in #1 of \newglossaryentry{#1}{#2}. These unique numbers are assigned to each entry for convenience. I have successfully compiled short tests of the document, which only used 1% of the full content. The resulting .glo file is about 1 MB in size.   Could this be the result of some error on my part or am I giving TeX too much work to do?  Update:  I have followed the instructions below (edited texmf.cnf and running  fmtutil-sys --all. This has allowed me to compile an additional portion of the book, but no matter the settings I add, I can't go beyond 5/8 of the way through.  A compile with extra_mem_top.xelatex = 30000000 and extra_mem_top.xelatex = 50000000 both result in:  TeX capacity exceeded, sorry [pool size=3186676].   Update:  I have done the following:  $ kpsewhich texmf.cnf /usr/local/texlive/2011/texmf.cnf $ nano /usr/local/texlive/2011/texmf.cnf   To the texmf.cnf file, following instructions at , I added:  main_memory = 230000000 extra_mem_top = 10000000 extra_mem_bot = 10000000 save_size = 150000 stack_size = 150000  main_memory.xelatex = 30000000 extra_mem_top.xelatex = 30000000   After this, I tried: - fmtutil-sys --all, then compiling xelatex file.tex. - fmtutil --all, then compiling xelatex file.tex. - fmtutil-sys --byfmt xelatex, then compiling with xelatex file.tex. - texhash, then compiling with xelatex file.tex.  All of these resulted in no changes in results. I still get:  TeX capacity exceeded, sorry [pool size=3186676]. I want to make sure all of the data in my plugins/themes is handled securely  before entering the database and before being output to the browser. My problem is that there are situations where the API handles the sanitization for you -- like when saving post meta fields -- and others where the plugin/theme author is wholly responsible for doing it -- like when saving custom settings.  For the scope of this question, I'm not concerned about validating data at the domain level -- e.g., checking that an Age field on a form is between 0 and 120, or that an e-mail address is valid. I'm only concerned about security -- e.g., escaping SQL queries to avoid SQL injection when saving to the database, or sanitizing data that's output to HTML templates to avoid XSS.  For output sanitization, I know that you always need to use functions like esc_html() and esc_attr() when echo'ing variables into HTML templates. But, what about when using ? Do they all sanitize the output already? If so, for which context (general HTML, tag attributes, etc)? Some functions have variants for different contexts (like the_title_attribute(), but most don't.  For input sanitization, I know that I need to use $wpdb-&gt;prepare() when making manual queries, but what about when using the Settings API to create a plugin settings page, or saving post meta fields for a custom post type?  Right now I've just been digging through Core and reading tutorials every time I use a function to find out if it sanitizes or not, but that's error-prone and time consuming. I'm hoping to find some kind of comprehensive list of all the possible situations and whether or not the API handles it. e.g.,  API validates/sanitizes   Saving post meta with update_postmeta() Saving user meta with update_user_meta() Outputting a post title - use the contextually appropriate variant of the_title() etc   You have to manually validate/sanitize   Saving plugin options with the Settings API. Pass a callback as the 3rd parameter of register_setting(). Direct database queries: Wrap the query in $wpdb-&gt;prepare(). Outputting variables in HTML. Use esc_attr(), esc_html(), etc etc   I'd also be interested to understand why the API provides it in certain situations, but not others. I'm assuming it has something to do with the unknown nature of the data, but would love to hear a thorough explanation. I'm trying to align a legend inside a table caption, so that the colons are vertically aligned. I can do it with the align ambient outside of the caption, but if I use the same code inside the caption the pdf won't compile (I use LuaTeX to compile). I'm using the package caption.  EDIT: i want something like this:    for which i've written this code:  \begin{align} \begin{split} a : {} &amp; the~first~letter~of~the~alphabet \\ b : {} &amp; the~second~one \\ and : {} &amp; so~on \end{split} \end{align}   There might be a more elegant way... but i don't know it.  Anyway, I can't do it inside the caption, that's why i'm stuck. Adding Basemaps from Google or Bing in QGIS Pointer vs. Reference What would be better practice when giving a function the original variable to work with:  unsigned long x = 4;  void func1(unsigned long&amp; val) {      val = 5;             } func1(x);   or:  void func2(unsigned long* val) {      *val = 5; } func2(&amp;x);   IOW: Is there any reason to pick one over another? Integrating Factor Method. Why Can We Set the Constant of Integration to Zero? My textbook gives a demonstration of the use of the integrating factor method for solving first order ordinary differential equations:  $\dfrac{dx}{dt} + p(t)x = r(t)$  $\implies g(t)\dfrac{dx}{dt} + g(t)p(t)x = g(t)r(t)$  $\dfrac{d}{dt}[g(t)x]$  We use the product rule and compare the expression to the left-hand side of the above equation:  $g(t)\dfrac{dx}{dt} + \dfrac{dg}{dt}x = g(t)\dfrac{dx}{dt}+g(t)p(t)x$  $\therefore \dfrac{dg}{dt} = g(t)p(t)$  The above equation is separable.  $\therefore \int\dfrac{dg}{g(t)} = \int p(t) dt$  $\implies ln[g(t)] = \int p(t)dt$  My textbook then says that, "We can set the constant of integration to zero -- any function that satisfies $\dfrac{dg}{dt} = g(t)p(t)$ will do for our purposes". However, it gives no explanation as to why this is the case. Why can we set the constant of integration to zero? Why is any function that satisfied $\dfrac{dg}{dt} = g(t)p(t)$ appropriate for our purposes?  I would greatly appreciate it if people could please take the time to elaborate on this. Are mixed geometry types allowed in shapefiles? Does the shapefile support mixed geometry types (ie. point and polygon all in the same file)? Blackboard bold variants for Greek letters It is common (or it used to be) to use a blackboard-bold variant of \mu to denote roots of unity in some mathematical papers.  However, despite searching (several times, periodically over several years) I have never been able to locate any package or technique that makes this possible, other than using Metafont or possibly hunting through the font definitions to see if it is something I can create a variant of (along the lines of the suggestions in Section 8 of the Comprehensive LaTeX symbol list).  Thus far, I haven't been sufficiently motivated to learn how to do any of this (although it probably would have resulted in a net time savings), and I feel like I cannot be the only person who would have tried.  Is anyone aware of an existing way to produce this character? Which document class is being used? Is there a way to programmatically determine which document class is in effect?  I'd like to be able to write conditional macros that behave differently depending on which document class is currently being used. Quantum mechanical books for mathematicians I'm a mathematician. I have good knowledge of superior analysis, distribution theory, Hilbert spaces, Sobolev spaces, and applications to PDE theory. I also have good knowledge of differential geometry. I would like to study the Semiclassic Analysis, but perhaps I must first study the foundations of quantum mechanics. So I would like to know what book you recommend me to begin studying quantum mechanics. I'm primarily interested in a mathematical point of view. I have seen some books of this type, but I would like to have some other opinion.  Thanks for every reply Why does the find command blow up in /run/? I used the following command to check python versions as given by . It does work except for one error, shown below. Can any one explain why?  $ sudo find / -type f -executable -iname 'python*' -exec file -i '{}' \; \     | awk -F: '/x-executable; charset=binary/ {print $1}' \     | xargs readlink -f | sort -u | xargs -I % sh -c 'echo -n "%: "; % -V'   Error:  find: ‘/run/user/1000/gvfs’: Permission denied Pros and Cons of a Decentralized Puppet Architecture We have around 300 RHEL servers that are currently connecting to a Puppetmaster server.  However, we have noticed some performance bottlenecks and it is the point of failure in our system.  I am fairly new to puppet in general and I am considering creating a decentralized puppet architecture instead of having Puppet clients connect to the Puppetmaster server.  Aside from what I would suspect to happen such as performance gain and lack of signing and exchanging SSL certs for new machines, what are other pros and cons to setting up a decentralized architecture? I was watching , and it got me thinking about when optional parameters are available in C# what is going to be the recommended way to declare methods that do not need all parameters specified?  For example something like the FileStream class has about fifteen different constructors which can be divided into logical 'families' e.g. the ones below from a string, the ones from an IntPtr and the ones from a SafeFileHandle.  FileStream(string,FileMode); FileStream(string,FileMode,FileAccess); FileStream(string,FileMode,FileAccess,FileShare); FileStream(string,FileMode,FileAccess,FileShare,int); FileStream(string,FileMode,FileAccess,FileShare,int,bool);   It seems to me that this type of pattern could be simplified by having three constructors instead, and using optional parameters for the ones that can be defaulted, which would make the different families of constructors more distinct [note: I know this change will not be made in the BCL, I'm talking hypothetically for this type of situation].  What do you think? From C# 4.0 will it make more sense to make closely related groups of constructors and methods a single method with optional parameters, or is there a good reason to stick with the traditional many-overload mechanism? Returning from a finally block in Java I was surprised recently to find that it's possible to have a return statement in a finally block in Java.  It seems like lots of people think it's a bad thing to do as described in ''. Scratching a little deeper, I also found '' which shows some pretty horrible examples of other types of flow control in finally blocks.  So, my question is, can anyone give me an example where a return statement (or other flow control) in a finally block produces better / more readable code? Algorithm for offsetting a latitude/longitude by some amount of meters Why xargs can't work with tail -f? I want tail -f /var/log/syslog | grep it with pattern "arpwatch" and send every line to myself via jabber: xmpp username@jabber.server using xargs  tail -f /var/log/syslog | grep arpwatch | xargs sendxmpp username@jabber.server   no working.  but tail  /var/log/syslog | grep arpwatch | sendxmpp username@jabber.server   works well.  I think it's some fundamental thing about xargs and tail -f that I don't understand. is $y = \sqrt{x^2 + 1}− x$ a injective (one-to-one) function? I have a function  $y = \sqrt{x^2 + 1}− x$ and I need to prove if it's a Injective function (one-to-one).  The function f is injective if and only if for all a and b in A, if f(a) = f(b), then a = b  $\sqrt{a^2 + 1} − a = \sqrt{b^2 + 1} − b$  $\sqrt{a^2 + 1} + b = \sqrt{b^2 + 1} + a$  $(\sqrt{a^2 + 1} + b)^2 = (\sqrt{b^2 + 1} + a)^2$  $a^2 + 1 + b^2 + 2b\sqrt{a^2 + 1} = b^2 + 1 + a^2 + 2a\sqrt{b^2 + 1}$  $2b\sqrt{a^2 + 1} = 2a\sqrt{b^2 + 1}$  $b\sqrt{a^2 + 1} = a\sqrt{b^2 + 1}$  $(b\sqrt{a^2 + 1})^2 = (a\sqrt{b^2 + 1})^2$  $b^2(a^2 + 1) = a^2(b^2 + 1)$  $b^2a^2 + b^2 = a^2b^2 + a^2$  $b^2 = a^2$  $\sqrt{b^2} = \sqrt{a^2}$  $b = \pm a$  then the function is not injective because $b$ in not equal to $a$, but using online  the function is injective. The current process for self-deletion of a user account has several problematic aspects, both in the process itself and in the end result. Some of these issues are:   The process requires manual intervention of a mod or SE employee, leading to delays and sometimes mistakes. It is more complicated than it has to be, which can lead to the impression that SE is imposing some rather arbitrary-looking restrictions and steps one has to take. This can give the impression that the user isn't really in control of his private data at SE. It is irreversible once the account is deleted, although an account can be partially reconstructed with a lot of manual effort from an SE developer. There is no real protection against mod/SE employee errors, if an account is deleted in error, there is no easy way to undo the damage. Because it is manual, it consumes the time of SE employees that have to deal with it  (unless  is used), removing useful voting information and annoying users that lose reputation that way.   I'm proposing an alternative way of handling self-deletion that would be automated, and also reversible to some extent, while still being pretty much a hard-delete (and not a soft-delete that would be problematic with respect to user privacy). The process would work roughly like this:   The user clicks a "delete profile" button in his profile. There should be a way to indicate if you want to delete all profiles on all SE sites, only on this site and a way to select multiple sites from a list where the profile should be deleted. It is verified that the user has true access to the account in some way (confirmation mail?) and not just someone that found the unlocked computer of the user. A countdown until deletion is started (I'd go with 48h, but that could be different). The timer shouldn't be too long, but long enough to correct mistakes and leave users a bit of time to reconsider. Alternative options would be to enable users to override the countdown if they really want to nuke their account immediately. Another option would be to soft-delete the account immediately, and make the countdown only for hard-deletion of the user data. Upon deletion, the posts of the user and his votes are transferred to a newly created blank account, the original account itself is hard-deleted with all the remaining data it contains. The dummy account that holds the user's data should be flagged in some way as deleted, so that the profile links will be disabled, the profile won't be accessible and it won't appear in any user lists.  The user receives a private code that can be used to claim ownership of the account. Other ways are not possible as all private information is removed about the account. This allows for an automatic way of reclaiming most of the important parts of a deleted account. The ability to restore a deleted account might have to be somewhat restricted to avoid misusing it to get rid of the account history. It is more meant as an additional safeguard so that account reconstruction is more easily possible in rare cases. Such additional safeguards might be necessary as the deletion itself would be automatic and without oversight from SE or moderators.   I personally think that the information which posts and votes were connected to a (now anonymized) account is not sensitive enough that it would have to be removed on account deletion. My idea is that this would be close enough to a hard-delete that it satisfies any privacy concerns, but still allow reassociation of posts with a recovered account. The partial reversibility would alleviate concerns about removing the manual oversight by mods and SE employees over the account deletion process. Prove that at most $2k+1$ independent sets form the set of vertices of a graph, where $k$ is the maximum degree.