if statement in python not working with or and integers
How to test multiple variables against a single value?
Drawing Roman laurel leaves (SPQR) in TikZ I was trying to get the symbol of the old .  I'm actually interested in the laurel leaves, and not so much in the banner per se.  What I would like to have is something like this (in Tikz, as oppose to simply \includegraphics).  With the possibility to change the stylish A to any other simple roman letter.    I'm a complete newbie with TikZ, and even though I know this question sounds like do this for me, I would really appreciate if someone could at least throw in an sketch where to start. How do I select all but two types of entities in Minecraft with the type selector? Let G be a group, where $(ab)^3=(a^3)(b^3)$ and $(ab)^5=(a^5)(b^5)$. Prove that $G$ is abelian group.  Thank you in advance. Any help is appreciated. Image looks embossed when converted to SVG Why did the limit of power change from wizard/witch to wand? So in the first 5 or 6 books, it was very clear that the wand chooses the wizard and the power/level of the spells the wizard produces is based on the knowledge and skill of the wizard.  This is referenced by people constantly being telling Harry that he wasn't skilled enough to perform certain spells, or Bellatrix telling Harry that he needed to mean the Cruciatus curse for it to be effective.  However, in the 7th book, this entire idea is changed to the wand being the thing that's powerful and regardless of the wizard's/witch's skill or knowledge, he/she could still perform a very advanced spell if it's something the wand could handle.  Goyle accidentally creating a fire serpent is something that instantly comes to mind from the movies(I don't remember if that happened in the book).  So, my question is, what actually holds the power, the wizard/witch, or the wand? How to solve this integral? $I=\int{e^x \Big(2\log x+\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{x^2}\Big)dx}$ $$I=\int{e^x \Big(2\log x+\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{x^2}\Big)dx}$$ I have tried to use many methods of substitution  But I am aware of a formula  $$I=\int{e^x[f(x)+f'(x)]dx}=e^xf(x)+C$$  but can this formula be applied to the above equation What are weapon damage dice? Following discussion , what constitutes a weapon damage die?  Is it any damage die dealt by the weapon? For example, consider a  longsword.     While the sword is ablaze, it deals an extra 2d6 fire damage to any target it hits.   What are the weapon damage dice? Just the 1d8 from the longsword? Or do the 2d6 Fire damage also count? Sometimes, a question is perfectly solved by suggestion or actual resolution given in "comments" under it. In such case, how to mark that answer (comment) as "Accepted Answer"? Due to this, the question remains unanswered even if solution is provided in comment. How are the number of views in a question calculated? Prove that $f'(a)=\lim_{x\rightarrow a}f'(x)$. Let $f$ be a real-valued function continuous on $[a,b]$ and differentiable on $(a,b)$. Suppose that $\lim_{x\rightarrow a}f'(x)$ exists. Then, prove that $f$ is differentiable at $a$ and $f'(a)=\lim_{x\rightarrow a}f'(x)$.    It seems like an easy example, but a little bit tricky. I'm not sure which theorems should be used in here.    ==============================================================  Using @David Mitra's advice and @Pete L. Clark's notes I tried to solve this proof. I want to know my proof is correct or not.  By MVT, for $h&gt;0$ and $c_h \in (a,a+h)$ $$\frac{f(a+h)-f(a)}{h}=f'(c_h)$$ and $\lim_{h \rightarrow 0^+}c_h=a$.    Then $$\lim_{h \rightarrow 0^+}\frac{f(a+h)-f(a)}{h}=\lim_{h \rightarrow 0^+}f'(c_h)=\lim_{h \rightarrow 0^+}f'(a)$$   But that's enough? I think I should show something more, but don't know what it is. How to automatically generate a stacktrace when my program crashes I am working on Linux with the GCC compiler. When my C++ program crashes I would like it to automatically generate a stacktrace.  My program is being run by many different users and it also runs on Linux, Windows and Macintosh (all versions are compiled using gcc).  I would like my program to be able to generate a stack trace when it crashes and the next time the user runs it, it will ask them if it is ok to send the stack trace to me so I can track down the problem. I can handle the sending the info to me but I don't know how to generate the trace string. Any ideas? Why do we use von Neumann ordinals and not Zermelo ordinals? Why do we use von Neumann ordinals, $$ 0 = \emptyset $$ $$ n+1 = n \cup \{n\} $$  and not Zermelo ordinals? $$ 0 = \emptyset $$ $$ n+1 = \{ n \} $$ What term describes a non-offensive substitute for a swear word?   For example, Battlestar Galactica used frack instead of fuck. Another example is the use of snap instead of shit.  I think I may have heard a single-word term used to describe such alternate non-offensive words before, but I don’t know what it is. If $A$ has two eigenvalues $\lambda _1, \lambda_2$ and $\dim (E_{\lambda_1})=n-1$, then $A$ is diagonalizable Hamiltonian Cycle Problem At the moment I'm trying to prove the statement:     $K_n$ is an edge disjoint union of Hamiltonian cycles when $n$ is odd.   ($K_n$ is the complete graph with $n$ vertices)  So far, I think I've come up with a proof. We know the total number of edges in $K_n$ is $n(n-1)/2$ (or $n \choose 2$) and we can split our graph into individual Hamiltonian cycles of degree 2.   We also know that for n vertices all having degree 2, there must consequently be $n$ edges. Thus we write $n(n-1)/2 = n + n + ... n$ (here I'm just splitting $K_n$'s edges into some number of distinct Hamiltonian paths) and the deduction that $n$ must be odd follows easily.  However, the assumption I made - that we can always split $K_n$ into Hamiltonian paths of degree 2 if $K_n$ can be written as a disjoint union described above - I'm having trouble proving. I've only relied on trying different values for $n$ trials and it hasn't faltered yet. So, I'm asking:     If it is true, how do you prove that if $K_n$ can be split into distinct Hamiltonian cycles, it can be split in such a way that each Hamiltonian cycle is of degree 2? If I want to draw an overline over some text, not an equation, how can I do it? \overline seems to only work in math mode, and when used outside of math mode, it automatically says "Missing $ inserted". Redirect the output of a command in `time command` I am trying to time something using:  /usr/bin/time myCommand   However, since /usr/bin/time writes to stderr, if myCommand also writes to stderr, I will get more than just time's output on the stream. What I want to do is, redirect all of myCommand's output to /dev/null, but still write time's output to stderr. Using an example myCommand that writes to stderr of ls /nofile, we see that (obviously) there is no output at all with the following:  $ /usr/bin/time ls /nofile 2&gt; /dev/null $   Without any redirection, we see both the output from ls (to stderr) and the output from time (also to stderr):  $ /usr/bin/time ls /nofile ls: cannot access /nofile: No such file or directory 0.00user 0.00system 0:00.00elapsed 0%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 3776maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+278minor)pagefaults 0swaps   What I want is something that simply produces:  $ /usr/bin/time ls /nofile &gt; RedirectThatImAskingFor 0.00user 0.00system 0:00.00elapsed 0%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 3776maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+278minor)pagefaults 0swaps   Any ideas? I want to make a persistent live Ubuntu USB drive with more than 4GB of storage.   I know there is an option of installing directly on the drive but I don't want to do this as it will restrict the drive from working on different computers.   One option is to make an additional partition with extra space but if I do this how can I get newly installed software to be stored on this partition? When one wants to list various cases/classes/categories/types of objects in a string of conjunctions, is it preferable (or even mandatory) to keep on using (the same) preposition in front of each one them?  Moreover, does singular or plural form of the word "case", "class", "category" make any difference in the previous question?  Examples:   In the present article, we study the case of X, of Y and of Z objects. (in this example, as in most of the ones I have in mind, it is the preposition "of" which is relevant to my question). We study the cases/classes of X and of Y objects. vs. We study the cases/classes of X and Y objects.   Although it is rather clear that, in the singular case, the absence of "of" in later conjuncts may lead to a logical confusion (e.g., mistakenly taken as the one class/case of objects which are both X and Y), when it comes to plural of the words "case", "class", etc., this might not be an issue. Still, there might anyway be a rule in the plural setting as well. Changing default width of blocks in beamer