Color a table with toprule and cmidrule
A single row background colour
Variable number of arguments in C++? Is it possible in PHP to do something like this? How would you go about writing a function? Here is an example. The order is the most important thing.  $customer['address'] = '123 fake st'; $customer['name'] = 'Tim'; $customer['dob'] = '12/08/1986'; $customer['dontSortMe'] = 'this value doesnt need to be sorted';   And I'd like to do something like   $properOrderedArray = sortArrayByArray($customer, array('name', 'dob', 'address'));   Because at the end I use a foreach() and they're not in the right order (because I append the values to a string which needs to be in the correct order and I don't know in advance all of the array keys/values).  I've looked through PHP's internal array functions but it seems you can only sort alphabetically or numerically. Is a music band a singular or a collective entity, grammatically speaking? Duplicate:    What is correct to say?  Korn* is a great band  OR  Korn* are a great band.  (* You can replace your favourite band's name here) Of course everybody there is no doubt about the following sentences:  The Beatles are a great band Led Zeppelin is a great band  But with certain kinds of names, the situation becomes difficult.  Metallica are a great band  OR  Metallica is a great band  Is there any consensus on this matter? In general, when can I omit that from a sentence?   Can I omit that (emphasized) in sentence (2) below?        We say that such algorithms handle concept drift and can learn from time-changing data streams.   When the statistical properties of the target variable change, we say that concept drift has occurred.   She told me that some of her classmates failed.      To me, sentences (1) and (3) sound better without that. If I omit that from (2), it just doesn't sound right when I read it out loud. (I should point out I'm not a native speaker.)  How do you decide when to omit it? Is it just a matter of taste? (I know that is sometimes mandatory.)  Can you think of sentences that "sound better" with that? Can you think of sentences that "sound better" without that? Can you think of a few sentences where it is wrong to omit that? Get total duration of video files in a directory I have a list of .ts files:   out1.ts ... out749.ts   out8159.ts  out8818.ts   How can I get the total duration (running time) of all these files? I have done major updates to my website, and renamed all my URLs.  How can I tell Google that I have renamed these URLs and let Google refresh its index?  My website URL: http://www.pndmasr.com/  My sitemap: http://www.pndmasr.com/sitemap.xml  I have uploaded my sitemap via Google Webmaster Tools many times.  However, every time I search Google for "pndmasr", I still get results with old pages. I have waited more than 3 days but the problem remains. Any suggestions?  Is there a problem with my sitemap? Expression for a choice which isn't really one I created a simple service layer polygon in network analyst (ArcGIS Desktop 10.2) with no hierarchies set in the street network. Now I don't understand why is this polygon created along some particular streets?   Why isn't is properly spread out? For example, why doesn't the polygon cover the areas/streets I have marked in red? Obviously those marked areas are also within 1 km.  The impedance is 1 km and 2 km respectively.   The streets are also well connected individual line elements as you can see the junctions. jQuery get all divs which do not have class attribute babel shorthand "| doesn't work in macros The package babel with the ngerman option (and most other languages as well, but not english) provides the shorthand "|, which prevents a ligature at the given position (see p. 81 of the , e.g. Auf"|lage will result in the word Auflage without an fl-ligature (as is desired because, in German, you don't want ligatures across morpheme borders).  However, when placed in a macro, "| doesn't work anymore. Why is this and how can I circumvent it?  \documentclass{article}  %\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}% doesn't help \usepackage[ngerman]{babel}  \newcommand{\foo}{"|}  \begin{document}  ff  f"|f  f\foo f  \end{document} Pairs of numbers with a given LCM I have an intuitive scenario. Consider we have a spaceship just below the event horizon of a BH, which is merging with another black hole.  Finally, the singularities merge and we have a single black hole again.  But, in the transient stage, it is unclear to me if a timelike world-line would exist to leave the system.  I suspect, the metric is probably far too complex for an analytical solution, but in the worst case, it could be maybe solved numerically.  As far I know, black hole merges are examined mainly in an inspiral scenario. I suspect, maybe the escape is possible only if they have a hyperbolic-like orbit (i.e. there is no inspiral, but they simply collide).  Is it possible? Which one of these two statements is correct?     Our staff do ...      Our staff does ...   And is staffs ever correct? In plain English, how does casting spells and using creature abilities work with the stack and priority? I'm a relatively new player to Magic: the Gathering. I was reading  to try to understand exactly when it's okay to cast instants (e.g. ) and use some abilities (e.g.  should be tappable sometime during other peoples' turns), but I don't seem to be making much progress: as I come to understand some things, others make less sense.  My confusion is boundless  For instance: to cast  one needs priority. Spells go on the stack, and priority gets passed at some points (I have no idea when), and effects on the stack are resolved when both players have passed priority. But when is that? I can't find any mention of when the other player gets the priority to cast an instant, except on their own turn. Furthermore,  states that during the Main Phase:     505.4. Second, the active player gets priority. Players may cast spells and activate abilities. The active player may play a land.   So players (plural) may cast spells, but only the active player has priority, so only the active player can cast an instant. The turn rules, and the rules on , never mention any point at which the other player gets priority, so when can they possibly Cancel?  In addition, you can only cast a spell when the stack is empty, so the entire stack must be able to be resolved in your turn at some point.  I need an explanation!  I could go on a bit more. There is also  which can be overloaded to "Counter each spell you don't control", which seems like it could only possibly work with an understanding of the stack.  Could someone explain, in simple English:   When can Instants be cast? When can tap abilities be used? What do Instants and abilities have to do with the Stack and Priority? I was recently in a bit of a quandary over which answer to accept to .  Of the answers I got, two were the clear leaders and, of course, I up-voted both. Choosing a 'winner' was more difficult though as their approaches were quite different.  Answer A addressed my question and provided a clear and well thought out response. I'd anticipate that this answer would be of most use to a user who found my question via a search. Selecting this would probably be the more community-focused way to go.  Answer B took a more lateral approach and made some guesses at the business logic behind my request, suggesting that I might be asking the wrong question. Their solution was based on this assumption - and they were spot on. Answer B formed the basis of my fix for the problem.  So... Best answer to the question or best solution to the problem - they may not always be the same thing.   I took the selfish approach and went with B. I'm not losing sleep over it, but I do wonder if I did the right thing? Is there a word for four times as much, analogous to once, twice, and thrice? Is it true that the order of $ab$ is always equal to the order of $ba$? I am a student who has taken the basic calculus courses but I am working through Calculus (the fourth edition) by Spivak in my spare time in order to both review the material and to gain a more rigorous understanding of the concepts. I am currently in Chapter 8 where he supplies a proof of the basis of the Intermediate Value Theorem, Theorem 7-1 (pp. 135-136 of the fourth edition). It seems mostly straightforward but I think there is some nuance of it that I don't grasp.  I am including in this post the statement Theorem 6-3 since he references it in the proof of Theorem 7-1 as well as part of Theorem 7-1 itself.     Theorem 6-3 Suppose $f$ is continuous at $a$, and $f(a) &gt; 0$. Then $f(x) &gt; 0$ for all $x$ in some interval containing $a$; more precisely, there is a number $\delta &gt; 0$ such that $f(x) &gt; 0$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-a| &lt; \delta$. Similarly, if $f(a) &lt; 0$, then there is a number $\delta &gt; 0$ such that $f(x) &lt; 0$ for all $x$ satisfying $|x-a| &lt; \delta$.     Problem 6-16 is also referenced. However,it is the same thing as Theorem 6-3 for one-sided limits. The following proof is the Theorem 7-1 up through the paragraph which I don't fully understand.     Theorem 7-1: If $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $f(a) &lt; 0 &lt; f(b)$, then there is some number $z$ in $[a,b]$ such that $f(x) = 0$.  Proof: Define the set $A$ as follows:  $$A = \{x : a \le x\le b, \mbox{ and } f \mbox{ is negative on the interval } [a,x] \}.$$  &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Clearly $A \ne \emptyset$, since $a$ is in $A$; in fact, there is some $\delta &gt; 0$ such that $A$ contains all points $x$ satisfying $a \le x &lt; a + \delta$; this follows from Problem 6-16, since $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$ and $f(a)&lt;0$. Similarly, $b$ is an upper bound for $A$ and, in fact, there is a $\delta &gt; 0$ such that all points $x$ satisfying $b-\delta &lt; x \le b$ are upper bounds for $A$; this also follows from Problem 6-16, since $f(b) &gt; 0$. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; From these remarks it follows that $A$ has a least upper bound $\alpha$ and that $a &lt; \alpha &lt; b$. We now wish to show that $f(\alpha) = 0$, by eliminating the possibilities $f(\alpha) &lt; 0$ and $f(\alpha) &gt; 0$. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Suppose first that $f(\alpha) &lt; 0$. By Theorem 6-3, there is a $\delta &gt; 0$ such that $f(x) &lt; 0$ for $\alpha - \delta &lt; x &lt; \alpha + \delta$. Now there is some number $x_0$ in $A$ which satisfies $\alpha - \delta &lt; x_0 &lt; \alpha$ (because otherwise $\alpha$ would not be the least upper bound of $A$). This means that $f$ is negative on the whole interval $[a,x_0]$. But if $x_1$ is a number between $\alpha$ and $\alpha+\delta$, then $f$ is also negative on the whole interval $[x_0,x_1]$. Therefore $f$ is negative on the interval $[a,x_1]$, so $x_1$ is in $A$. But this contradicts the fact that $\alpha$ is an upper bound for $A$; our original assumption that $f(\alpha) &lt; 0$ must be false.    The point I don't understand is in the final paragraph of the excerpt. Why does Spivak split the interval $[a,b]$ up into the subintervals $\lbrack a,x_0 \rbrack$ and $[x_0,x_1]$? Isn't it true that, because $\alpha$ is a least upper bound of $A$ and $f$ is continuous on $[a,b]$, it must be true that if $a \le x &lt; \alpha$ then $f(x)&lt;0$? I understand the need to pick out the $x_1$ but not the $x_0$. Especially perplexing is the statement "there is some number $x_0$ in $A$ which satisfies $\alpha - \delta &lt; x_0 &lt; \alpha$ (because otherwise $\alpha$ would not be the least upper bound of $A$." Wouldn't it be true that if there were some $x_0$ such that $a \le x_0 &lt; \alpha$ and $f(x_0) \ge 0$ that $x_0$ would be an upper bound for $A$, contradicting that $\alpha$ is the least upper bound of $A$?  Thanks for any help. So, I have proven already that every open set in $\mathbb{R}$ can be written as a countable union of disjoint open intervals; i.e., that $\mathcal{O} = \bigcup_{i=1}^\infty (a_{x_i}, b_{x_i})$.  Now, consider the closed interval $\left [ a + \frac{1}{n}, b - \frac{1}{n}\right ] \subset (a, b)$.  Since the midpoint of $(a,b)$ is $\frac{b-a}{2}$, we need $\displaystyle n &gt; \frac{2}{b-a}$.  Otherwise, $\displaystyle a + \frac{b-a}{2} = a + \frac{1}{ \frac{2}{b-a}} = b - \frac{1}{ \frac{2}{b-a}} = b - \frac{b-a}{2}$, and our interval will be degenerate.  Note that $\forall (a,b) \in \mathcal{O}$,   $\displaystyle \bigcup_{n = \frac{b-a}{2}+1}^{\infty} \left[ a + \frac{1}{n}, b - \frac{1}{n} \right] = (a,b)$.  So, we have $\displaystyle \mathcal{O} = \bigcup_{i=1}^\infty \left ( \bigcup_{n = \frac{b-a}{2} + 1}^\infty \left[ a_{x_i}+\frac{1}{n}, b_{x_i}-\frac{1}{n} \right] \right)$.  But, I don't like this. It looks like I'm still just taking a union of open sets.  Please help me get this to look like the union of closed sets.  (For unbounded intervals, I know what to do - it should follow from this relatively easily). Each Stack Exchange site has a weekly email newsletter.  What is in the newsletter? Who composes them and selects what is included? How do I subscribe and unsubscribe to a newsletter?