ssh into server from desktop & run program X, later ssh into server from laptop & interact with X
Keep processes running after SSH session disconnects
Using Custom Labels in a Class I have the below If statements using some hard coded strings and I want to make them use as custom labels. I have created custom labels with the same String names as given below. So how can I make these statements to use the Custom Labels I created ?  if(monitoringFrequency == 'daily'){             return dateValue.addDays(1);         }else if(monitoringFrequency == 'weekly'){             return dateValue.addDays(7);         }else if(monitoringFrequency == 'monthly'){             return dateValue.addMonths(1); Using strtok with a std::string I have a string that I would like to tokenize. But the C strtok() function requires my string to be a char*. How can I do this simply?  I tried:  token = strtok(str.c_str(), " ");    which fails because it turns it into a const char*, not a char* Setting chain length My chain broke and in a moment of silliness (I was cold wet and slightly annoyed)  I threw the broken one away before thinking about measuring the new one.  Is there a guide to getting the chain length/tension correct ?  It's an 8 speed road bike (Shimano Sora back, double ring front) Are there any reserved words in SQLite? Prove that for any piecewise smooth curve it is possible to find the parametrisation $\phi$ that is consistent with its length, ie.  length of a curve segment between $\phi(a)$ and $\phi(b)$ is equal to $|b-a|$.  It seems intuitive, but I don't have any idea how can I show this in the formal way. When does System.gc() do something? Using Mosfet with seperate Logic Converter and Arduino How to make Unicode charset in cmd.exe by default? The lines wrap so much on v1.0.85 that only a few items can be displayed.  Edit: This is on the world's most low end tablet, Azpen A727.  Screenshots of the old:    and new, showing loss of quality Continuous versus differentiable A function is "differentiable" if it has a derivative. A function is "continuous" if it has no sudden jumps in it.  Until today, I thought these were merely two equivalent definitions of the same concept. But I've read some stuff today which seems to be claiming that this is not the case.  The obvious next question is "why?" Apparently somebody has already asked:    Several answers were given, but I don't understand any of them. In particular, Wikipedia and one of the replies above both claim that $|x|$ has no derivative. Can anyone explain this extremely unexpected result?  Edit: Apparently some people dislike the fact that this is non-obvious to me. To be clear: I am not saying that the result is untrue. (I'm sure many great mathematicians have analysed the question very carefuly and are quite sure of the answer.) I am saying that it is extremely perplexing. (As a general rule, mathematics has a habit of doing that. Which is one of the reasons why we demand proof of everything.)  In particular, can anyone explain precisely why the derivative of $|x|$ at zero is not simply zero? After all, the function is neither increasing nor decreasing, which ought to mean the derivative is zero. Alternatively, the expression  $$\frac{|x + a| - |x - a|}{a}$$  becomes closer and closer to zero as $a$ becomes closer to zero when $x=0$. (In fact, it is exactly zero for all $a$!) Is that not how derivatives work?  Several answers have suggested that the derivative is not defined here "because there would be a jump in the derivative at that point". This seems to assert that a continuous function must never have a discontinuous derivative; I'm not convinced that this is the case. Can anyone confirm or refuse this argument? In a moment of cheapness, I decided not to order a 5v to 3.3v level shifter from Sparkfun, but instead to put it together myself.  The  used a  MOSFET, but since I enjoy surface-mount soldering about as much as root canal treatment, I decided to use a  that is through-hole mounted and easily available from my preferred supplier.  The results of this were sub-optimal.  When pulling the 5v line to ground, all was fine - the 3.3v side went to 0.07v.  But when pulling the 3.3v to ground, the 5v line showed around 4.14v (it was otherwise a touch above 5.1v).  On a closer reading of the datasheets involved, as well as the original Philips application note on the subject, I began to come to the conclusion that the gate threshold voltage was the problem.  By altering the schematic and tying the MOSFET's gate to 5v instead of 3.3v, both sides seem to work fine.  Pulling either side low causes the other side to go low.  I'm not, however, at all confident that this is actually a sane thing to do.  My understanding of the original schematic isn't deep enough to form a sensible opinion.  Will this modified schematic work, or are the current good results I'm seeing mere fluke or a precursor to something releasing magic smoke? Has a free neutron ever been shown to absorb/emit/interact with a photon? Protons only 'interact with' very high-energy photons, whether inside a nucleus or free, right?  I'm assuming the same about neutrons....  Neutrons have a small magnetic moment and a slight electric 'moment' (dipole?), correct?  They are sometimes considered to consist of a negative charge surrounding a positive charge?  I would assume that neutrons, in a nucleus or free, interact with photons even less often than protons, and that the gamma photon has to have an even higher energy than one interacting with a proton....  Lastly, I have read about 'photodisintegration', in which a nucleon is kicked out of a nucleus by a gamma ray.  It seems to happen to neutrons sometimes...  But, I am mostly curious about experimental evidence of free neutrons interacting with photons, how often it happens compared to free protons, and whether the interacting photon's energy has to be extremely high, higher even than a photon interacting with a proton... Does there exist a laser that is tunable over the whole visible spectrum? Does there exist a laser that is tunable over the whole visible spectrum? If so does there exist one that is solid state? This is to settle a score with my dumb workmates. Why does factoring eliminate a hole in the limit? Are there any coding style guidelines for LaTeX? I have looked through several questions and answers on EL&amp;U, and often there is an indication that American English prefers "have" while British English prefers "have got". In addition, there are several references to "have got" being more informal than "have" (e.g.: , ). But where is it considered more informal? In American English alone or both American and British English?   This point may seem obvious to those who made the above mentioned references, but the fact is that even the most fluent users of English in my country will say without a doubt that 'have got' is the preferred usage in the UK and, therefore, it must also be more formal. Why? Because in an academic environment, the more informal structures are generally frowned upon, outside some specific spoken exercises. And if the teachers insist on using "have got", it follows it isn't informal.  So, is the teaching of (British) English in our schools transmitting the wrong idea?  EDIT: I'm adding some information in answer to the comments.  I'm mainly concerned with the idea of possession:      I have got a cat vs. I have a cat and She has got a dog vs. She has a dog   As mentioned in the comments, every (Portuguese) student will be told that "have" and "have got", when it comes to the idea of possession, are absolute synonyms, the only two differences being:    "have got" is preferred by British English, "have" is preferred by American English   the negative and interrogative structures differ    I have never heard of any distinction in formality. In fact, I was rather surprised when I went through the EL&amp;U archives and read about it.  So, would "I have got a cat" be as formal/informal as "I have a cat"?   And how do British and American English look at its formality/informality? Is it the same? Why no ooVoo on ubuntu? Why not brew wine and make beer? Non native speaker so I can't fully discern the difference.  Thanks. Why use a prime number in hashCode? What is the most practical way to implement camera/viewport to a 2D-game?  I've read, that I should store the object world position instead of position relative to the screen?  Current situation:  I have implemented a simple 2D-game where I load objects and levels from XML-files. Currently the level XML-file looks like this:  &lt;map&gt;    &lt;tile obj="ground" x="0" y="555" /&gt;    &lt;tile obj="ground" x="16" y="555" /&gt;    &lt;tile obj="ground" x="32" y="555" /&gt;    ... &lt;/map&gt;   All objects have a 2d-vector "position" storing their current location on the screen.  What I want it to be:    In the picture:   Camera is either 800x600 or 640x480 Blocks and sprites are 16x16 pixels. World size may vary The coordinates probably should be normalized relative to the world, not to the screen? Viewport position relative to player's x, y and moves when the player reaches camera dead zone (similar to ).   I'm asking pseudo examples / articles, but if you need to know what I'm using for the development: SDL &amp; C/C++.