text:
Irish/Verbs

Verbs

 * TO DO: add lots of step-by-step examples, showing how to apply the rules

Regular Verbs
There are two categories of verbs in Irish, and you need to know which category a verb belongs to before you can conjugate it. Fortunately, it is very easy to remember the categories.
 * Type 1 verbs (usually) have one syllable.
 * Type 2 verbs (usually) have two syllables.

You also need to be able to tell if the verb ends in a broad or slender consonant. This means that you need to know four sets of endings, one for each of the following cases:

 * Type 1 verbs ending in a broad consonant
 * Type 1 verbs ending in a slender consonant
 * Type 2 verbs ending in a broad consonant
 * Type 2 verbs ending in a slender consonant

Or does it? Some people memorise it that way. Others memorise only two sets of endings, one set forType 1 verbs, one for Type 2 verbs, and then apply the "caol le caol agus leathan le leathan" rule. I myself find it easiest to memorise one set of endings, plus a small set of "middles", and then apply the "caol le caol agus leathan le leathan" rule. Whichever way you do it, you will get the same result. But if you find my system confusing, by all means ignore this and follow the method described by your book or teacher.

Here are the tables I used to learn how to conjugate verbs in Irish. The stem of a regular verb is the imperative singular, the form you use to give a command. The format used in these summary tables is shown below.

Past Subjunctive
Same endings as past habitual, but don't lenite, if the verb is not preceded by anything that could cause lenition (the conjunctions preceding past subjunctive usually eclipse, though). Past subjunctive is usually used after the conjunctions dá (= dhá) "if", mura (=mara, mana, muna) "unless" and sula (= sara) "before". Conditional mood can be and is indeed usually used today instead of past subjunctive.

Direct relative
Except for combined forms: Add broad s to present habitual and future idh → (e)as

Verbal noun (general guidelines)
Type 1: stem + adh Type 2: stem + ú Verbs ending in -(e)áil: stem (no ending) Verbs ending in slender l, n, r: stem + t

Verbal adjective
Type 1: stem + ta or te Except: tha or the after b, c, f, g, m, p, r Except: Drop bh or mh and add fa

Type 2: stem + ithe Except: te after l, n, r (don't syncopate)

General Rules (for all tenses)
"caol le caol agus leathan le leathan" rule.
 * ía → ío
 * Drop a after á,ó,ú
 * after slender consonant, ó → eo
 * t(h) + t → t
 * When an ending begins with a consonant, pad it with a vowel after the consonant, if needed to satisfy the

Rules For Type I Verbs

 * -áigh, -óigh, -úigh, -eoigh, -uaigh, drop (i)gh and use broad f and slender t in verb endings.
 * -éigh, drop (i)gh and use slender f and slender t in verb endings.
 * -igh alone or after short vowel, drop gh, i → í (except before t), and use slender f and slender t in verb endings... except for the verb "faigh".
 * áil  → ál unless ending begins with t

Rules For Type II Verbs

 * If ending has an initial vowel, drop last syllable:
 * drop (a)igh
 * drop (a)i before final l, n, r, s

Examples for Regular Verbs
glan (clean) -Type 1 (Broad ending)

Present          '''An nglanann tú? Glanaim/'Ní ghlan''aim Past             '''Ar ghlan tú? Ghlan (mé)/Níor ghlan''' Future           '''An nglanfaidh tú? Glanfaidh/'Ní ghlan''faidh Conditional      '''An nglanfá? Ghlanfainn/'Ní ghlan''fainn Imperfect        '''An nglantá? Ghlannainn/'Ní ghlan''ainn Pres. Subjunctive '''An nglana tú? Go nglana mé/Nár ghlana'''

cuir (put) -Type 1 (Slender ending)

Present          '''An gcuireann tú? Cuirim/'Ní chuir''im Past             '''Ar chuir tú? Chuir (mé)/Níor chuir''' Future           '''An gcuirfidh tú? Cuirfidh/'Ní chuir''fidh Conditional      '''An gcuirfeá? Chuirfinn/'Ní chuir''finn Imperfect        '''An gcuirteá? Chuirinn/'Ní chuir''inn Pres. Subjunctive '''An gcuire tú? Go gcuire mé/Nár chuire'''

ceannaigh (buy) -Type 2 (Broad ending)

Present          '''An gceannaíonn tú? Ceannaím/'Ní cheann''aím Past             '''Ar cheannaigh tú? Cheannaigh (mé)/Níor cheannaigh''' Future           '''An gceannóidh tú? Ceannóidh/'Ní cheann''óidh Conditional      '''An gceannófá? Cheannóinn/'Ní cheann''óinn Imperfect        '''An gceannaíteá? Cheannaínn/'Ní chean''aínn Pres. Subjunctive '''An gceanaí tú? Go gceannaí mé/Nár cheanna'''

Irregular Verbs
Irish only has a handful of irregular verbs, so breathe a sigh of relief. Unfortunately, as with most languages, the most commonly used verbs are irregular. So the sooner you face them, the better.

If you look up the irregular verbs in your foclóir, you may see a big conjugation table and assume you'll have to memorise the whole thing. Wrong! It's really much easier than that. It will help if you remember this guiding principle, which may not be obvious to the beginner:

 * The irregular verbs use the same endings as the regular verbs; it is the stem that changes.

There are a few exceptions, of course.

One very good way to learn these verbs is simply to read this list of questions and answers, out loud, once a day for a week or two. After that, you will find that you know most of them without having made an effort to memorise. Then you can focus on the particular ones that give you trouble.

abair (say)

present     '''An ndeir tú? Deirim/Ní deirim''' past        '''An ndúirt tú? Dúirt/Ní dúirt''' future      '''An ndéarfaidh tú? Déarfaidh/Ní déarfaidh'''

beir (catch, give birth to)

present     '''An mbeireann tú? Beirim/Ní bheirim''' past        '''Ar rug tú? Rug/Níor rug''' future      '''An mbéarfaidh tú? Béarfaidh/Ní bhéarfaidh'''

clois (hear)

present     '''An gcloiseann tú? Cloisim/Ní chloisim''' past        '''Ar chuala tú? Chuala/Níor chuala''' future      '''An gcloisfidh tú? Cloisfidh/Ní chloisfidh'''

cluin (hear)

present     '''An gcluineann tú? Cluinim/Ní chluinim''' past        '''Ar chuala tú? Chuala/Níor chuala''' future      '''An gcluinfidh tú? Cluinfidh/Ní chluinfidh'''

déan (make, do)

present      '''An ndéanann tú? Déanaim/Ní dhéanaim''' past         '''An ndearna tú? Rinne/Ní dhearna''' future       '''An ndéanfaidh tú? Déanfaidh/Ní dhéanfaidh'''

faigh (get)

present      '''An bhfaigheann tú? Faighim/Ní fhaighim''' past         '''An bhfuair tú? Fuair/Ní bhfuair''' future       '''An bhfaighidh tú? Gheobhaidh/Ní bhfaighidh'''

feic (see)

present      '''An bhfeiceann tú? Feicim (Chím in Ulster)/Ní fheicim''' past         '''An bhfaca tú? Chonaic/Ní fhaca''' future       '''An bhfeicfidh tú? Feicfidh (Chífidh in Ulster)/Ní fheicfidh'''

ith (eat)

present      '''An itheann tú? Ithim /Ní ithim''' past         '''Ar ith tú? D'ith/Níor ith''' future       '''An íosfaidh tú? Íosfaidh/Ní íosfaidh'''

tabhair (give)

present      '''An dtugann tú? Tugaim /Ní thugaim''' past         '''Ar thug tú? Thug/Níor thug''' future       '''An dtabharfaidh tú? Tabharfaidh/Ní thabharfaidh'''

tar (come)

present      '''An dtagann tú? Tagaim /Ní thagaim''' past         '''Ar tháinig tú? Tháinig/Níor tháinig''' future       '''An dtiocfaidh tú? Tiocfaidh/Ní thiocfaidh'''

téigh (go)

present      '''An dtéann tú? Téim /Ní théim''' past         '''An ndeachaigh tú? Chuaigh/Ní dheachaigh''' future       '''An rachaidh tú? Rachaidh/Ní rachaidh'''

bí (be)

present      '''An bhfuil tú? Tá (or Táim)/Níl (or Nílim''') Pres(Habitual)'''An mbíonn tú? Bím/Ní bhím''' past         '''An raibh tú? Bhí/Ní raibh''' future       '''An mbeidh tú? Beidh/Ní bheidh'''

title: Irish/Verbs


text: Irish/Commonly Confused Words

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Irish/Commonly Confused Words


text:
Irish/Compound Prepositions

Compound Prepositions

 * opposite : ar aghaidh, os coinne, os comhair
 * behind : ar chúl, taobh thiar de
 * during : ar feadh, i gcaitheamh, i rith, in imeacht, le linn
 * throughout : ar fud
 * looking for : ar lorg
 * like, in the manner of : ar nós
 * for the sake of : ar son, thar ceann, de cheann
 * about to : ar tí
 * as a result of, because of : de bharr, dá bhrí, de thairbhe
 * according to : de réir
 * on account of : de thairbhe
 * for the purpose of : faoi choinne, le haghaidh, i gcomhair
 * to meet : faoi dhéin
 * to the end of, to the top of : go ceann
 * in charge of, minding : i bhfeighil, i gcionn
 * along with : i dteannta
 * against : i gcoinne, in aghaidh, in éadan
 * in the middle of : i lár
 * present at, in the presence of : i láthair
 * among : i measc
 * after : i ndiaidh, tar éis
 * in place of : in áit
 * along with : le cois, i dteannta, in éineacht le
 * beside : le hais, in aice (le), taobh le
 * above : os cionn
 * in front of : os coinne, os comhair
 * near : in aice (le)
 * therefore : dá bhrí sin
 * under the care of : faoi chúram
 * at the head of : ar ceann
 * at the end of : i gceann, faoi cheann
 * in reference to : um cheann (very rare)

Remember:
 * A compound preposition usually governs a genitive. But if it ends in a simple preposition, then not: in éineacht le behaves essentially as the simple preposition le.

 * "ar" doesn't lenite a naked noun (i.e. a noun not preceded by an article) when it's part of a compound preposition or when it signifies an abstract state rather than a concrete position, or when it signifies a relative position. Cf. ar muin capaill "on horseback", but ar mhuin an chapaill áirithe seo "on the back of this particular horse". Note, though, the phrase ar fheabhas "excellent", which violates this rule (originally ar a fheabhas).

Essentially the same rule applies to thar, cf. the expressions thar barr "excellent", thar fóir "beyond (reasonable) limits, beyond measure", thar cailc "beyond the chalked mark, overstepping the limit"

title: Irish/Compound Prepositions


text:
Irish/Prefixes

As in many other languages, Irish adds prefixes (réimíreanna) to words to create new words. If you become familiar with the prefixes below, you may double your vocabulary!

Note that some prefixes are separated from the base word by a hyphen, and some prefixes cause lenition.

title: Irish/Prefixes


text: Irish/Dictionaries

title: Irish/Dictionaries


text: Irish/Other Resources

title: Irish/Other Resources


text:
Template:Irish/TOC

 Lessons

Unit One: 1 2 3 4

Unit Two: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Unit Three: Lesson Index

 Language Reference

Spelling and Pronunciation - Grammar

 Wikiversity

More Irish language resources can be found at Wikiversity's Department of Irish Studies

title: Template:Irish/TOC


text:
Horticulture/Alchemilla

Alchemilla is a genus of herbaceous perennial plants in the Rosaceae, commonly known as Lady's mantle. There are about 300 species, the majority native to cool temperate and subarctic regions of Europe and Asia, but a few species are native to the mountains of Africa, North America and South America.

Description
Rhizomatous, ground-covering plants with palmately veined, usually lobed leaves.

Growing Conditions
Humus rich, moist, but well-drained soils, sun to part shade.

Species
Cultivated species include:
 * ../Alchemilla alpina/
 * ../Alchemilla conjuncta/
 * ../Alchemilla ellenbeckii/
 * ../Alchemilla erythropoda/
 * ../Alchemilla faeroensis/
 * ../Alchemilla fulgens/
 * ../Alchemilla mollis/
 * ../Alchemilla xanthochlora/

Uses
Prinarily grown as ground covers or container plants, but also grown for cut flowers and herbal gardens. Some species are also adapted to rock gardens.

Uses in herbalism include a leaf decoction is used to treat sore eyes, sore skin and also to staunch bleeding. An infusion is used to regulate periods.

Maintenance
Cut back flowers to encourage further blooming. Can be cut back to the ground in midsummer to spur new foliar growth.

Propagation
Division or seed.

Pests and Diseases
../Powdery Mildew/

../Leaf Spots/

../Caterpillars/ ../Slugs and Snails/
 * Emperor Moth: ../Pavonia pavonia/
 * Grizzled Skipper: ../Pyrgus malvae/

title: Horticulture/Alchemilla


text:
Horticulture/Liriope

Liriope is a genus of low, grass-like, flowering plants from East Asia. Some species are often used in landscaping in temperate latitudes. They often called lilyturf in North America, though they are often simply referred to as "Liriopes". Once classified with lilies in the family Liliaceae, genetic studies have caused the genus to be included in Ruscaceae.

Description
Liriopes are grass-like, rhizomatous perennials with broad, strap-like leaves. Flowers are borne on thin scapes, generally at about the same height as the foliage.

Growing conditions
Full sun to medium shade. Drought tolerant.

Uses
Liriope are usually used in the garden for their evergreen foliage.

Some species, e.g., L. spicata, grow aggressively in the right conditions, spreading by runners; hence their nickname, "creeping lilyturf".

Liriope spicata is used as a substitute for Ophiopogon japonicus in Chinese medicine as an herb for yin deficiency.

Pests and diseases
../Crown Rot/
 * ../Phytophthora palmivora/

title: Horticulture/Liriope


text:
Cookbook talk:Makizushi (Maki Roll)

Better pictures needed
Three of the pieces of sushi in one picture aren't even what's made in this recipe. There also isn't a picture of an inside out roll --MikedaSnipe 14:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should grab some images from commons:Category:Sushi. Just link them in like normal images, and Wikibooks will get them from Commons automatically. Webaware talk 23:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Visual instructions prehaps?
Just an idea to throw out there, I personally don't have the motivation. However, I found when learning to make sushi visuals helped a lot --MikedaSnipe 14:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Should we keep the things to remember?
Thought it might be useful, but it might not be cookbooky enough. --MikedaSnipe 14:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

title: Cookbook talk:Makizushi (Maki Roll)


text:
User:Karel~enwikibooks

We are making an example of a workshop using IT.

This is an effort of my bilingual education students ....

This WorkShop is called

Likes and Dislikes Food

Carlos Manuel

title: User:Karel~enwikibooks


text:
Horticulture/Spring Cleanup

Spring cleanup is among the busiest times in the garden, involving both cleaning up anything that wasn't taken care of in the fall cleanup, as well as getting the garden ready for the new season.

Step one - checkup:

 * Lawn
 * Check for broadleaf weeds, unwelcome grasses, bare spots
 * Garden Beds
 * Check for early weeds, perennials in need of cutback, bare spots needing filling, low spots, etc.
 * Trees and Shrubs
 * Broken/dead limbs
 * Soil and drainage issues
 * gullies, puddles, etc.

Step two - cleanup:
 * Lawn
 * Garden Beds
 * Trees and Shrubs
 * Soil and drainage

/Techniques

title: Horticulture/Spring Cleanup


text:
Wikibooks talk:Annotated texts/Archive1

Annotated sources v. Wikisource (first discussion moved from Staff Lounge)
All the contents for Shakespeare's plays and the Sherlock Holmes stories have been copied to Wikisource, which is the place for such things. These could now be deleted from this project, perhaps leaving a temporary link to Wikisource on the Main Page. Eclecticology 18:04, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * We plan to annotate those texts, so no thanks. When MediaWiki gets the ability to export Wikisource content to other projects, then we will delete our local copies. --mav 19:09, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Another annotation question:

Is the following the case: (1) Wikibooks is planning to have annotated texts, but (2) none of the texts at Annotated works is actually annotated yet. (Or, wait. The constitution seems to be annotated, but in a really crappy way.)(3) There is not now but at some point in the future will be a tag for annotations?

If so, is it reccomended that people put the texts in place but do not annotate them until more infrastructure is in place, that they wait to put the texts in until the infrastructure is in place, or that they use some intermediate annotation scheme until the infrastructure is in place?

(Sorry if these questions are addressed elsewhere, and I didn't see.) ??????????? 03:52, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Depends on the work, really. If it's like source text, put the text at Wikisource, and then when you want to annotate it, copy the text from Wikisource over... Dysprosia 04:35, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Hmm. But if, say, I've started wikifying it, even though I can't annotate yet...(see User:Kukkurovaca)???????????
 * It wouldn't be so hard to strip the wikiformatting and the line numbers, if that's what you want? Dysprosia 06:02, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * No, I'm suggesting I'm impatient. (smile)???????????

 * If you want to upload, that should be fine. There's not many strict guidelines here, so if you go ahead, you won't be shot down, drawn and quartered ;) Dysprosia 06:35, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * BTW if you do want to strip the Wikitext, put the text in an editor like vi and do :%s/^# //g, :%s/\[\[.*|\(.*\)\]\]/\1/g Dysprosia 06:48, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Good to know. Do you know if/when a note tag or other such provision will be in place????????????
 * No idea :/ Dysprosia 08:04, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

"Annotated works" and "Study guide bookshelf" (second discussion moved from Staff Lounge)
As some users have previously noted on the relevant talk pages, we have a confusing situation where there is one page for Annotated works, a different page one somewhat duplicating it called "Study guide bookshelf" plus a template appearing on the Wikibooks main page that combines the two of them in its title, called Study guide bookshelf (the title appearing on the Main Page is: "Annotated Texts and Study Guides").

I strongly propose doing one of two things:
 * Combining the two groups on the very same page and finding a single title that adequately describes what found in both of them.
 * Dividing them into two clear groups, with two different templates as well.

Personally, I favor the second option. I think much of the confusion has resulted because, on the one hand, there are classic works of literature with planned annotation, while on the other hand, there are test preparation guides in this category (like the SAT study guide).

My suggestion: One page+category with template entitled: "Annotated Texts" and a second page+category with template entitled "Test study guides."

What do people think? Dovi 12:54, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree, it is one of the next points for cleaning up. Did you notice that most of the so-called "Annotated Texts" are actually not annotated at all? As such, they should move to Wikisource, and there are not many books left there. I'd suggest the following: Combine the two bookshelves (since each of them is comparatively small), getting rid of "Annotated texts" (for now move the books to Study guides, subsection Annotated texts, but it seems most of them are there already anyway). Annotated texts is a nice idea, but it does not require a bookshelf by its own, unless it grows bigger.
 * B.t.w. I would suggest to put all Study guides of classical work into the (new) study guide namespace "Studyguide:Romeo and Juliet", etc. to clean things up, but that is a follow-up project. For now, I support the idea of getting rid of "Annotated texts" and having only one bookshelf. --Andreas 13:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Suggestion for cleaning up sounds good to me. As for "Studyguide" namespace, please explain how it is meant to be used. Would it have to be used for every page of a study guide? (That would seem cumbersome.)Dovi 21:03, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * There should be a clever standard behind this: Some people feel like it would be wise to put the words "Study guide" somehow into the title. People are just not sure about how to do this:

Study Guide:Shakespeare A Tale of Two Cities/Study guide/Characters Study Guide for CFA Exam Level 1
 * So things could be unified by a namespace that covers all these books, either "Study Guide:", "Study guide:" or "Studyguide:" or the like (it should be just consistent). Of course, if we decide on using a namespace, then all pages and all subpages have to use it.
 * If you feel your book Mishnah does not require the words "Study guide" in the title (because it is not meant as a study guide to Mishnah but the purpose is the text itself), then you don't have to use this namespace. For other books, a unique namespace would make sense. --Andreas 10:24, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hmmmm, interesting. Could you refer me to whatever discussion already exists on the namespace and its use, so that I can better understand it? (Offhand, it would seem to me that categories would do the job less intrusively. That plus tight interconnection between the various parts of the text.)

As far as Mishnah goes - it really is meant to be an "Annotated text" - i.e. the actual text in a useful form plus the creation of new study aids (introductions, notes, summaries...) to assist the reader.Dovi 13:02, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * Unfortunately I don't know of any discussion on the use of namespaces (other than the one we two are having right here.) You see, I would not call a book "A tale of two cities" if it is meant to be a study guide, because that is a book written by Charles Dickens. The book should be rather called "Study guide to 'A tale of two cities'" or shorter "Study guide:A tale of two cities". That Study guide appears in this case in the title has nothing to do with in what category I will put the book later.
 * It will probably be a broader discussion, since the cleanest way would be to put original work to Wikisource, and a book about the book (with links to the relevant passages) on Wikibooks.(This would be also the cleanest for the reader, since he knows immediately which parts are original and which are added by other contributors). But people are not so clean in this distinction (see The Golden Bough or Gardening for original work that made it into Wikibooks, meant to be edited later by someone else - but noone dared to do so yet). --Andreas 10:55, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry I've been away for a while! I think your distinction, while a good "clean" one, does not address all of the possibilities. Specifically, it leaves no place for Charles Dickens with introductions, commentary, and notes. What you mean by "study guides" to texts are meant to stand on their own, as companion volumes (i.e. the Wikibooks study guide to Charles Dickens as a companion to the Wikisource original text). However, there is yet another genre, one that includes the object of study (the original text), within the study guide. That is better called an "annotated text." I think this is what the person working on "Golden Bough" wants to do eventually, and it is what I've also tried to do with initial samples of Mishnah. This kind of project can legitimately (and usefully) be called by the actual title of the book.
 * I don't think there's any real problem, by the way, if Charles Dickens or Shakespeare sit here for a long time until someone decides they want to annotate them. That's the nature of wiki: people do it when they want to!
 * One last point: When we talk about the "original text" of Charles Dickens (to be kept on Wikisource), everyone knows pretty much exactly what is meant by that. However, when dealing with pre-modern texts it is much less clear. Any edition of a text from ancient or classical times involves a huge number of editorial decisions regarding textual criticism, formatting, puctuation, and numerous other details, often subjective decisions which can turn even the "original text" into a somewhat new creation. Here is where the border between Wikibooks and Wikisource becomes blurred. (I would suggest that an exact representation of a previously published edition of a classical text be held on Wikisource, while a digital version meant to incorporate new editing features be held here.) Dovi 07:33, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: Wikibooks talk:Annotated texts/Archive1


text:
Wikibooks talk:Be bold/Archive1

I don't think this should be a policy. I'm indifferent as to whether it should be an official or unofficial guideline, Jguk 21:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Please read the text from {{policy}}. Policies are rules and principles that the Wikibooks community has accepted and wikibookians must follow. Why must I follow this if it were nominated to be a policy? What if I were a new and timid editor who justed wanted to act as a wikignome while I learn the loops and strings? To require this a policy which Wikibookians must follow is absolutely ludicrous. You can't legislate morals, you can't legislate values, and you definitely cannot enforce them. --Iamunknown 10:47, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with both the above - unofficial guideline maybe but certainly not policy -- Herby talk thyme 11:56, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

 * There is currently mention of "being bold" as being an encouraged behavior in the decision making guideline. If we can turn that into a policy, then technically we can just let this be a policy. However, I would like to point out that be bold is a common mantra in wikimedia project, and we would like to encourage the behavior. Furthermore, I think there should be some kind of protection in place for the people who actually are bold, so that other people don't complain and say "That a-hole was too bold", or even "On this page, people arent allowed to be bold." Finally, I would like to point out that this page says "Wikibookians are encouraged to be bold", not "mandated" or anything like that. The policy basically says that boldness should be welcomed and encouraged as a matter of policy, but that being bold is something that people may do at their own discretion. I think that we absolutely should encourage it and protect it. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 15:53, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I fully agree that Wikibookians should be bold and that Wikibookians who are bold should not be complained about. I agree that Wikibookians should be encouraged to be bold. They should not, under any circumstance, however, be required to be bold. A policy is specifically "...rules and principles that the Wikibooks community has accepted and wikibookians must follow." I disagree. I think that Wikibookians should follow the ideas outlined in this text; thus I think this text should be a guideline.
 * Furthermore, as the text stands now, there is no protection for bold Wikibookians mentioned. I am unsure if it would be appropriate to include it here. It could, however, be included in Be civil, with an appropriate see also link at the bottom of this page.
 * I will try my hand at it sometime later, unless someone beats me to it. Cheers, Iamunknown 01:05, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I also agree that this should be a guideline, it still misses a very important topic that are changes in format and structure, those changes shouldn't be protected by the be bold directive, that type of changes should be addressed by a formal proposal if there are other users active on the book (or if it isn't stale). --Panic 00:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Everything should be protected by this guideline. The mandate isn't "be bold, except when you shouldnt be", or "be bold unless other people are looking". All wikibookians are always encouraged to take initiative to make the project better. We shouldnt limit or restrict that. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 20:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

official vs unofficial
Were can I find information on the differences on a official and unofficial guidelines ? (policies are always official, right ?) --Panic 00:34, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

 * You're expected to follow official guidelines unless you can show a bloody good reason not to - they will have community consensus. Unofficial guidelines have persuasive force only - they will not necessarily have community consensus, but have not been rejected. Jguk 13:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Where can one find the unofficial list of guidelines ? Or are you referring to guidelines and policies that didn't yet come to a "vote"/close ? --Panic 17:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 * There is no such distinction between "official" and "unofficial" guidelines. The only things that are recognized are "policy", "guideline", and "proposal". --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 20:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 * That was my understanding, but people continue to refer to unofficial guidelines/policies. --Panic 20:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 * There are a number of de facto rules around here, things that people do just because we've always done them. I believe that unless something is written and "official", that people should have the freedom to do whatever they want. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 20:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid I must disagree with Whiteknight here. Some policies apply even though they have not been written up. For example, I believe that when the Be civil policy was moved to enforce, it didn't create a new policy or change the way we do things in any way. Instead it just wrote down what the policy already was.

"Unofficial" is perhaps an unfortunate term. They don't have any formal force, but they will represent the views of the people who have written them. On Wikibooks, we do always tend to listen to people's views before taking a course of action, but that doesn't mean that we all always agree on which course of action is best. It's a judgment call as to how much weight, if any, to give to an "unofficial" guideline in any particular circumstance. However, I do believe that as long as you act reasonably, no-one will mind too much, even if it contradicts an "unofficial" guideline.

Maybe, in the light of the above, we should remove the term "unofficial guideline" and replace it with something like "discussion" or "user's essay".

It is, of course, only "official" policies and guidelines that need to be followed - but don't necessarily assume that they are all written down somewhere - some are just the customs which the current Wikibookians generally all adhere to. Jguk 21:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I had mentioned trying to do "comunity statements" at some point... this would qualify for that. -- SB_Johnny | talk 21:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

title: Wikibooks talk:Be bold/Archive1


text:
C++ Programming/Editor's Chapters needing work

Linker - Complete Internal linkage and External linkage information (remember to mention extern, unnamed namespaces and link to the relevant sections). Assignment and Operators - some hevy duty cleanup needed and removing of references and a simpler as possible introduction to operator overloading needed, pointing to the complete information already present on the book. Class/Inheritance - Multiple inheritance still need some work and example. Class/Interface class - Add description and give an example. C++ Programming/Classes - Possible rename to code/?/class (proper link to keyword table, good idea) restructure class members (data and function) and children pages, note that static is at present inside function members and talks on static data members... Language Comparisons - include information on how and that C++ can to use embedded ASM code. Programming Paradigms Abstract Classes Pure Abstract Classes Template meta-programming (TMP) C++ Programming/RAII Using Static Libraries - anyone willing to make add an example with a free IDE/Compiler ? (it is all its missing) Unified Modeling Language (UML) - remove wikipedia link and tie the text more with the C++ subject, (text also includes introduction to Modeling Tools and CASE). Encapsulation - try to demonstrate in the example how exposing data members can damage another part of the program STL - still missing to much info (some text on functors), see the other pages on the chapter string, I/O Streams. Win32 - Windows API, only the basic is there, there is a Windows Programming book probably reference or move some content there (they don't want C++ content). C++ Programming/Programming Languages/C++/Code/Statements/Scope - introduction to the concept of scope/context with references to the further insight and practical usefulness in sections like Namespaces, class space and flow control structures. C++ Programming/Threading - needs some content on Fibers, OpenMP, Inter-Process Communication (IPC), Threads, Critical Section, Synchronizing on Objects etc...

Orphans needing attention These pages are not linked to by this book. Please link to them, merge them into existing pages and mark them with, or if they are not desired mark them with. Thanks.

[ edit list above ]

|.


text:
Wikibooks:Policies and guidelines/Vote/Be Bold

Please review the policy under discussion before voting.

Introduction
This is largely a copy of the general philosophy that has been expressed on Wikipedia, but this is an attempt to put it into context here on Wikibooks.

Key Points

 * If something needs to be fixed, do it! Sitting around in committee and discussing how something should be done often means that nothing actually gets done.  Somebody needs to step up and try some things, even if others may not agree.  Most actions on Wikibooks are reversible as well, so if it doesn't quite work out, it can be undone by others.

 * Don't be reckless. You can go overboard and start making so many changes that serious objections are raised.

Votes

 * Only registered users with at least 20 edits can vote.
 * Vote ends at April 20th, 2007 00:01 GMT
 * Add votes in the format  #~

Support, as a guideline

 * 1) Rob Horning 20:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) --Panic 20:26, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 3) Mattb112885 (talk) 21:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 4) xixtas  talk 00:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 5) Webaware talk 22:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 6) Xania [[Image:Flag_of_Poland_2.svg|15px]]talk 23:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 7) --Mcld 16:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Abstain

 * Votes do not garner consensus; they may or may not indicate an existing consensus. If consensus already exists, as it appears it does, then it should be a guideline. --Iamunknown 01:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Comment - I agree with you in that voting is not required but it is what is stated on the decision making process (so we must use it or state a valid objection to break it), a call for objections is all it is really needed in most cases, I'm 100% behind you on that, see if you can express that in the draft of the WB:DMP to be approved... (btw take a look into User:Panic2k4/Decision_making_and_Community_consensus_on_Wikibooks it is still under work Xixtas raised some valid points that still needs to be addressed.) --Panic 02:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I do see a benefit of a "forced vote" like this so far as when a policy seems to have achieved a certain level of concensus, a vote like this is often a way to bring it to the attention of a larger group of individuals and perform the final last minute tweaks to the proposal or to voice objections that otherwise wouldn't have been raised. The vote about Wikiversity on Meta is an excellent example of this, and certainly forced the hand of the WMF to at least acknowledge that there was significant support for the idea.  It is rare for a vote to actually gain concensus, and I would have to agree that if there is significant disagreement, that any voting ought to be closed and the proposal reworked.  This does give legitimacy to policy decisions to show that a proposal or policy does have the support of much more than one or two administrators.  --Rob Horning 07:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Humm what about a making it a call for review (where a minimum number of users signed as being informed), this would remove the negatives aspects for a poll and address the important concerns you raised, no ? --Panic 16:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree with Panic; a discussions is much more meaningful. A vote creates a dichotomy ("yea" or "nay") where there simply is none. A policy or guideline is a subtle document; a person may disagree with one clause or one word and be forced to choose between "yea" or "nay" in a vote, whereas he or she could discuss with other people his or her concerns if a discussion were held. At the end of the discussion, if the majority felt it were necessary to vote, I would vote, but I feel there has been little contemporary discussion at least concerning this document and thus I abstain pending further discussion. --Iamunknown 16:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * The question here is how do you "ratify" or "make official" some sort of policy document? In the case of this document (and others here on Wikibooks) the editing and discussion went on for some time, has been cited in numerous other discussions, and has achieved a sort of ex-officio status.  Other significant policies that have gone through this exact process have been the Deletion Policy and Naming Policy.  Both were hotly debated, and achieved a level of concensus within the group of users that was developing the policies, but for many months (a great many) these policies were cited in VfD discussions and in the Staff Lounge.  Yet the "proposed policy" statement was listed during this whole time.  In the case of the Naming Policy, it was strongly felt that we needed to establish some sort of formal policy that had achieved a level of acceptance before some significant reorganization of Wikibooks took place.  The lack of authoritative policy on these matters significantly tied the hands of admins who wanted to enforce these concepts.

 * The opposite to this process of voting is instead something is simply "declared" as enforced policy, with only the insular group who wrote the policy in the first place being the ratifying authority. I see that this has occured with Administrators, where I have raised some significant objections to some of the passages after the fact.  Indeed, with this policy I don't even know what the "ratifying" authority on it really was.  I see that four users agreed with the idea, and barring nobody else monitoring the talk page it was moved to enforced policy.  In my opinion, such an "enforced" policy doesn't carry nearly so much "official" weight as the deletion policy and naming policy.  It is precisely this sort of behind the scene ratification process that I want to very much avoid.  Making new policies needs to be out in the open and as transparent as possible.

 * BTW, the reason I set the date for closing this vote (which was prematurely closed by Darklama) as being a couple of weeks out was to make sure that the whole Wikibooks community had a chance to see this policy before some sort of "official" action occurred. As can be seen from my efforts and objections on the Administrators' policy, objections after a policy becomes "official" tend to be ignored or rationalized, instead of compromises to the policy worked into the text.  --Rob Horning 17:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Another point that must be kept in mind is that this is a dynamic process we aren't voting on a static text but the closing of decission, to be fair, must address a fixed text or proposal, a limit on editing prior to closing a discussion should be implemented in the future.
 * I have no problem by the bold action of Darklama taking into consideration this guideline and as it was pretty static on the content, but more time must be given some people may not be present or have the possibility to participate in the discussion otherwise a week without any objections should be enough.
 * All this is something to consider stating on the decission making process draft. --Panic 21:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Agree with Panic on both points. -- xixtas talk 21:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments
This guideline is pretty stable and fundamental as someone said before (on the talk page), I'm surprised it wasn't already official since it gets cited all the time. Mattb112885 (talk) 21:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikibooks talk:Be bold

 * Good idea that this is put into policy. So when do we get to vote for assume good faith? Webaware talk 22:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have done some editing to it (since you have mentioned it) it seems to be yet to verbose (and restate things that are on other approved or to be approved texts), it can even have some of it removed and substituted by references to BeBold. --Panic 02:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and made it a guideline, since its been defacto guideline here a very long time and there have been no opposed votes. --dark lama  15:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * That seems to be a bit hasty, but I'm not going to seriously object here. Of course, that is also being bold by doing that sort of action :)  --Rob Horning 15:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Voting. I agree in the sense that voting shouldn't be the only step in the process. I would like to suggest that in the future we first have a discussion opened as a precursor to any formal poll. Perhaps under a heading of "Questions and Concerns" and give everyone a week or more to discuss the finer points of the proposal. I think voting is a necessary part of the process online of decision-making online. -- xixtas talk 22:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I could support this. By using such a simply policy to illustrate to the current generation of Wikibooks users how this process has occurred in the past, this really was more of a demonstration to get things moving.  When the unstable version of WB:WIW comes up for discussion, we had better be able to agree upon a process for validating that policy or we will completely split apart this community.  I hope this can be useful in helping form such a process.  Besides, this page also accomplished rather quickly the task of trying to move a proposed policy to some sort of enforced state.  I'm not trying to stir up a hornet's nest here.  --Rob Horning 23:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I also think it's a good idea to implement something for discussion, though I think that we should use something else as a guinea pig for the new process besides WIW since as Rob said it's likely to cause lots of rumblings if we don't have any organized manner we can agree on for discussion. Maybe the Fair Use Policy would be a good place to start? However, maybe we should just say we're doing discussions on the talk page, and then reserve these pages just for voting-related things, after all that's what the talk pages are for. Unless we'd use that for less formal discussion and these pages for more formal discussions? Would it be useful to have two discussion pages for the same policy? Mattb112885 (talk) 03:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


text:
Dutch/Vocabulary/What time is it?

Hoe laat is het? Saying what time it is quite different from English usage. In the following examples, we use times from 3 to 4 o'clock.

In Dutch time is told by reference to the closest whole or half hour.

__:00 / __:15 / __:30 / __:45
These are the four cardinal moments in an hour. Notice halfvier! The Dutch way of indicating half hours is towards the next hour, not past the previous one.

__:00
Example: In a full sentence time telling is usually initiated with Het is... ("It is ...")

__:01 to __:19
In this interval reference is made to the previous whole hour with the preposition over or, less frequently na. The word minuut can be omitted in fast speech. Sometimes an inflected form of the numeral tweeën, drieën, vieren is used, but more often this is cut short to just twee, drie, vier etc. The quarter hour __:15 has its own name kwart.

Examples: A more general way of indicating time is to say:

__:20

Between 3:15 and 3:20 (depending on the speaker) the reference point starts to shift to the nearest half hour, using the preposition voor.

Example:

__:21 to __:29
From __:20 on the reference point is the next half hour point.

Examples:

__:30
As said before the way the half hour is indicated differs by a whole hour between Dutch and English. All half hours are written as a single word: halfeen, halftwee, etc. through halftwaalf.

Example:

__:31 to __:39
Beyond __:30 the half hour remains the point of reference, using over or sometimes na. Examples:

__:40
From __:40 on the reference point can become the upcoming whole hour Example:

__:41 to __:59
From the quarter hour on, the reference point is the whole hour.

Examples:

title: Dutch/Vocabulary/What time is it?


text:
User talk:58.147.176.200

Regarding edits made during March 24 2007
Please take care not to replace Wikibooks pages with blank content. Blank pages are harmful to Wikibooks because they have a tendency to confuse readers. If it is a duplicate article, please redirect it to an appropriate existing page. If the page has been vandalised, please revert it to the last legitimate version. If you feel that the content of a page is inappropriate, please edit the page and replace it with appropriate content. If you believe there is no hope for the page, please see the deletion policy for how to proceed. If page is no longer useful, insert delete to its top. Thanks for contributing to Wikibooks! If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you did not make any unconstructive edits. Az1568(Talk) 21:15, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:58.147.176.200


text:
Transwiki:Relative density

Relative density is a dimensionless ratio of the densities of two materials. The term specific gravity is similar, except that the reference material is water. A relative density can help quantify the buoyancy between two materials, or determine the density of one "unknown" material using the "known" density of another material. Mathematically, relative density is expressed as:

G = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}}{\rho_\mathrm{reference}}\, $$

where $$G$$ is the relative density, and $$\rho$$ is the densities of the two materials in the same units (e.g., kg/m³, g/cm³).

Relative density is dimensionless, since it is a ratio between two quantities of same unit. If the ratio is greater than 1, the object will be heavier than the same volume of the reference. If it is less than 1, it will be lighter than the reference. It is important to specify the reference material when reporting a relative density, but when the reference material is not specified it is usually understood to be water at 3.98 ° C.

Specific gravity
Using water as a reference material can make the calculations using SI units convenient, since density of water is (approximately) 1000 kg/m³ or 1 g/cm³. Determining the specific gravity (same as relative density of an object relative to water) entails little effort, as the density of the object only needs to be divided by 1 or 1000, depending on the unit, e.g.:

G = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}}{\rho_\mathrm{H_2O}} = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}\ \mathrm{kg/m^3}}{1000\ \mathrm{kg/m^3}} = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}\ \mathrm{g/cm^3}}{1\ \mathrm{g/cm^3}}\, $$

Unitless properties of specific gravity
While it may seem that this would result in two different specific gravities based upon which unit is used, this is not the case. Consider an object with a density of $$4\ \mathrm{g/cm^3} $$. According to the above formula, the specific gravity of this object would be

G = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}}{\rho_\mathrm{H_2O}} = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}\ \mathrm{g/cm^3}}{1\ \mathrm{g/cm^3}} = \frac{4\ \mathrm{g/cm^3}}{1\ \mathrm{g/cm^3}}\, = 4$$

Convert this object into $$ \mathrm{kg/m^3} $$. The density of this object is:

\rho_\mathrm{object}=4\frac{\mathrm{g}}{\mathrm{cm^3}}*\frac{1\ \mathrm{kg}}{1000\ \mathrm{g}}*\frac{100^3\ \mathrm{cm^3}}{\mathrm{m^3}} = 4*1000 \frac{\mathrm{kg}}{\mathrm{m^3}} = 4000 \frac{\mathrm{kg}}{\mathrm{m^3}}\, $$

Hence the specific gravity of this object is:

G = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}}{\rho_\mathrm{H_2O}} = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}\ \mathrm{kg/m^3}}{1000\ \mathrm{kg/m^3}} = \frac{4000\ \mathrm{kg/m^3}}{1000\ \mathrm{kg/m^3}}\, = 4$$

Since the specific gravity is, in fact unitless, as long as the same reference is used and consistent units are used the specific gravity will be the exact same number. Hence specific gravity will also work with gravitational density instead of mass-based density. Calling the gravitational density of an object $$\gamma_\mathrm{object} = \rho_\mathrm{object}g_\mathrm{local}$$; where $$g_\mathrm{local}$$ is the the local gravitational constant...

G = \frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}}{\rho_\mathrm{H_2O}} = \frac{g_\mathrm{local}\ \mathrm{N/kg}\ \rho_\mathrm{object}\ \mathrm{kg/m^3}}{g_\mathrm{local}\ \mathrm{N/kg}\ \rho_\mathrm{H_2O}\ \mathrm{kg/m^3}} = \frac{\gamma_\mathrm{object}\ \mathrm{N/m^3}}{\gamma_\mathrm{H_2O}\ \mathrm{N/m^3}}\, $$

Difference between specific gravity and relative density
Specific gravity is a special case of relative density. While specific gravity has a reference density of water, relative density can have any reference density that is used. It is best to specify the reference material when using relative density, using subscripts:

RD_\mathrm{Object/Reference} \, $$

Which states "the relative density of the object with respect to the reference material".

While relative density will not change as long as consistent units are maintained, the relative density is relative to its reference. The relative density of an object relative to mercury, is diffirent then the relative density with respect to water (specific gravity).

Taking the relative density with respect to alcohol, the water has a specific gravity of 1.2, and the iron has a specific gravity of 10. Taking the relative density relative to water, the numbers would be .78, 1, and 7.9. With respect to iron, the numbers are .1, .12, and 1. These are all correct relative densities, however it is with different reference points. Note that again, units are not needed and hence these numbers are correct no matter what unit system is used.

Practical uses of the unitless properties of relative density
Maintaining a consistent set of units is important. The units do not need to even be in terms of "amount of substance" per "volume" directly. For example, suppose someone wanted to find out the specific gravity of a rock. They could see that the rock deflected a certain spring by 3 inches. Then they put on a reference substance, which deflected the spring by 5 inches. The first rock made the water in a certain graduated cylinder rise by 20 mm, and the reference made it rise by 34 mm. The relative density between these two objects can easily be determined without having to figure out several constants which would be needed to determine the density directly (like the spring constant or the cross sectional area of the cylinder).

Since they know that the density of each object would be:

\rho_\mathrm{object}=\frac{Mass}{Volume} = \frac{Deflection*Spring\ Constant*Gravity}{Displacement_\mathrm{Water Line} * Area_\mathrm{Cylinder}}\, $$

Then the relative density is:

RD=\frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}}{\rho_\mathrm{H_2O}} =\frac{\frac{Deflection_\mathrm{Obj.}*Spring\ Constant*Gravity}{Displacement_\mathrm{Obj.} * Area_\mathrm{Cylinder}}} {\frac{Deflection_\mathrm{Ref.}*Spring\ Constant*Gravity}{Displacement_\mathrm{Ref.} * Area_\mathrm{Cylinder}}}\, $$

RD=\frac{\frac{Deflection_\mathrm{Obj.}}{Displacement_\mathrm{Obj.}}}{\frac{Deflection_\mathrm{Ref.}}{Displacement_\mathrm{Ref.}}} = \frac{\frac{3\ \mathrm{in}}{20\ \mathrm{mm}}}{\frac{5\ \mathrm{in}}{34\ \mathrm{mm}}}=\frac{3\ \mathrm{in} * 34\ \mathrm{mm}}{5\ \mathrm{in} * 20\ \mathrm{mm}} = 1.02\, $$

Now if they knew the actual density of the reference substance, then they can find the actual density of the test object. In this example, the density of the reference substance is 300000 N/inch³ (which would be absurd, but shows the power of the RD system). Then the density of the test substance is 300000 N/in³ * 1.02 = 306000 N/in³.

Temperature dependence

 * See Density for a table of the measured densities of water at various temperatures.

Changes in temperature affect the densities of materials, and the relative densities between two materials need to be corrected at certain temperatures. It is best to record the temperatures of the two materials, expressed here:
 * relative density: $$ 8.15_{4^\circ \mathrm{C}}^{20^\circ \mathrm{C}} \,$$ or specific gravity: $$ 2.432_0^{15} $$

where the superscript indicate the temperature at which the density of the material is measured, and the subscripts indicate the temperature of the water to which it is compared.

Relative density and hydrometers
One important use of relative density is hydrometers. It is relatively easy to show that the displacement of a hydrometer is approximately directly proportional to the change of relative density for small changes with respect to any reference that the hydrometer is placed into.

local gravitational constant.

Since the hydrometer is in static equilibrium, this force is equal to the gravitational force pulling down on the hydrometer, or $$mg \,$$, where $$m \,$$ is the mass of the entire hydrometer. Hence:
 * $$mg = \rho_\mathrm{Ref.} V_\mathrm{red} g \,$$ (1)
 * $$m = \rho_\mathrm{Ref.} V_\mathrm{red} \,$$ (2)
 * $$V_\mathrm{red} = \frac{m}{\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}}$$ (3)

At this line, the specific gravity is 1. When the hydrometer is placed in the new fluid, shown as green, a new mark is placed. Note that the hydrometer has dropped slightly, hence the specific gravity is lighter in this fluid then in the first fluid. Since the mass does not change and it is assumed that the gravitational constant does not change, the force holding up the hydrometer in the second fluid is the exact same as the force holding up the hydrometer in the first fluid, i.e $$mg$$

mg = \rho_\mathrm{New} (V_\mathrm{red}+(-\Delta x)A) g \, $$ (4)

where
 * $$\Delta x$$ is the displacement of the line. Since the line went down, the displacement is negative.
 * $$A$$ is the cross sectional area of the shaft.

m = \rho_\mathrm{New} (V_\mathrm{red}-\Delta x A) \, $$ (5)

m = \rho_\mathrm{New} (V_\mathrm{red}) - (\rho_\mathrm{New}\Delta x A) \, $$ (6)

Substituiting from equation 3

m = m \frac{\rho_\mathrm{New}}{\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}} - (\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}\Delta x A) \, $$ (7)

but

\frac{\rho_\mathrm{New}}{\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}}\, $$

is simply the relative density of the new fluid. Hence...

m = m RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.} - (\rho_\mathrm{New}\Delta x A) \, $$ (8)

1 = RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.} - \rho_\mathrm{New}\frac{\Delta x A}{m} \, $$ (9)

RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.}-1 = \rho_\mathrm{New}\frac{(\Delta x) A}{m} \, $$ (10)

For small differences in RD, $$\rho_\mathrm{New} = \rho_\mathrm{Ref.}$$, and hence

RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.}-1 = \rho_\mathrm{Ref.}\frac{(\Delta x) A}{m} \, $$ (11)

Knowing the original density, the cross-sectional area of the stalk, and the mass of the hydrometer, one can calculate the change of the relative density with respect to the reference fluid by simply measuring the displacement. Note that if the hydrometer falls down, the RD has gone less then 1. And if the hydrometer rises, RD is higher then the reference fluid.

For more percise measurements:

RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.}-1 = RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.}\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}\frac{(\Delta x) A}{m} \, $$ (12)

1=RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.}(1 - \rho_\mathrm{Ref.}\frac{(\Delta x) A}{m}) \, $$ (13)

RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.} = \frac{1}{(1 - \rho_\mathrm{Ref.}\frac{(\Delta x) A}{m})} \, $$ (14)

Expanding this as an infinite geometric series:

RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.} = \frac{1}{(1 - \rho_\mathrm{Ref.}\frac{(\Delta x) A}{m})} \, $$ (15)

RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.} = \sum_{k=0}^\infty ar^{k} = \frac{a}{1-r} = \sum_{k=0}^\infty (\frac{\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}(\Delta x) A}{m})^{k} $$ (16)

RD_\mathrm{New/Ref.} = 1 + (\frac{\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}(\Delta x) A}{m}) + (\frac{\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}(\Delta x) A}{m})^2 + (\frac{\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}(\Delta x) A}{m})^3 +.... $$ (17)

As a first-order of approximation, this reduces to the previous formula. Note that this formula becomes invalid if the hydrometer's density is greater than the density of the reference fluid, i.e. it sinks below the surface in the reference fluid. That is the only way the term $$(\frac{\rho_\mathrm{Ref.}(\Delta x) A}{m})$$ (which can be seen as a relative density comparing the density of the reference fluid and the density of the entire mass of the hydrometer divided by the small displaced volume) can be greater than 1.

Uses of relative density
Relative density is often used by geologists and mineralogists to help determine the mineral content of a rock or other sample. Gemologists use it as an aid in the identification of gemstones. The reason that relative density is measured in terms of the density of water is because that is the easiest way to measure it in the field. Basically, density is defined as the mass of a sample divided by its volume. With an irregularly shaped rock, the volume can be very difficult to accurately measure. One way is to put it in a water-filled graduated cylinder and see how much water it displaces. Relative density is more easily and perhaps more accurately measured without measuring volume. Simply suspend the sample from a spring scale and weigh it under water. The following formula is used to determine the specific gravity:

G = \frac{W}{W - F}\, $$

where
 * $$G$$ is the relative density,
 * $$W$$ is the weight of the sample (measured in pounds-force, newtons, or some other unit of force),
 * $$F$$ is the force, measured in the same units, while the sample was submerged.

Note that with this technique it is difficult to measure relative densities less than one, because in order to do so, the sign of F must change, requiring the measurement of the downward force needed to keep the sample underwater.

Another practical method uses three measurements. The mineral sample is weighed dry. Then a container filled to the brim with water is weighed, and weighed again with the sample immersed, after the displaced water has overflowed and been removed. Subtracting the last reading from the sum of the first two readings gives the weight of the displaced water. The relative density result is the dry sample weight divided by that of the displaced water. This method works with scales that can't easily accommodate a suspended sample, and also allows for measurement of samples that are less dense than water. Surface tension of the water may keep a significant amount of water from overflowing, which is especially problematic for small objects being immersed. A workaround would be to use a water container with as small a mouth as possible.

Relative density is not important physically as much as it is in reporting data to the masses. It is difficult to explain the high density of iridium as simply being 22650 kg/m³. To the masses, this number is just a large number. But if the facts instead detailed that the density of iridium is nearly twice that of lead, people can understand how heavy iridium really is. As a reporter, the relative density tells more information to the general public then the actual number does.

Specific gravity of water
The specific gravity of liquids or solids is defined as the ratio of density of the material to the density of distilled water. (S = density of the material/density of water). This implies that if the specific gravity is approximately equal to 1.000, then the density of the material is close to the density of water. If the specific gravity is large this means that the density of the material is much larger than the density of water and if the specific gravity is small this implies that the density of the material is much smaller than the density of water.

The specific gravity of a gas is generally defined by comparing the density of the gas with the density of air at a temperature of 20 degrees Celsius and a pressure of 101.325 kPa absolute, where the density is 1.205 kg/m3. Specific Gravity is unitless.

External link

 * Weight Per Cubic Foot And Specific Gravity

title: Transwiki:Relative density


text:
Talk:Relationships/Dating

what is the reference to page 69- is this from another area, if so please elaborate on reference

I fixed the reference. Thanks for pointing out the mistake.--Thomas David Kehoe 15:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Dating boys
How should girl behave on their first date especially when there nervous? Brittoney McKenzie (discuss • contribs) 16:59, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Relationships/Dating


text: PHP Programming/OOP5/Advanced Input validation


text:
User:Mcld

Hi - my homepage is http://www.mcld.co.uk/

title: User:Mcld


text:
C++ Programming/Editor's Chapters needing merge

Please add here pages that are not linked to from anywhere in this book (but have to be merged or marked for deletion).

Procedural idioms in C++ C++ Programming/Memory Management - new, delete, smart pointers, Garbage Collection and RAII, Comparison to C, Common Mistakes C++ Programming/Memory Management Techniques C++ Programming/Chapter Learning the Basics C++ Programming/Lost Bits

[ edit list above ]

|.


text:
Talk:MATLAB Programming/Differences between Octave and MATLAB

['abc';'abc']
At least in Matlab R2015a, it works as intended.
 * I reckon it would work in MATLAB. And why would it be 4 columns wide in Octave??? —DIV (120.17.98.150 (discuss) 06:00, 24 January 2019 (UTC))

Please remain neutral
There's quite an anti-MATLAB point of view in the language used in this text at the moment, using phrases like "MATLAB chokes on this" (which is a correct colloquial expression for what happens, but since the example is of commands that are not legal MATLAB syntax, the implication that MATLAB somehow breaks or fails to run correctly is false) or "This is a kludge" or "Octave properly parses this" (both systems parse the example *properly*, but for one system it is not valid syntax).

This chapter should take a neutral tone of voice, appealing both to MATLAB users and Octave users. I use Octave and I don't want Octave users to come across as sounding like they have a grudge against MATLAB! Please help edit this page to a good neutral point of view. I'll make some changes now.

--Mcld 23:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree, to avoid edit conflicts I won't make any changed until you're done, but the information in the article, though useful, could use some NPOV-itizing. Mattb112885 (talk) 23:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

We should reorganize this article into language differences, function differences, library differences. Angry bee (discuss • contribs) 20:04, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

please update - MATLAB 7.0 is very outdated.
release 7.0 is release 14 which was shipped way before 2006. some of the statements are just incorrect or not valid anymore.

Reorganization
For the benefit of the reader, I think this article should be reorganized in two parts: Usually users are accustomed to either one and would like to make their code friendlier for the other environment. I admit there might be some overlap between the two parts, but the point is that users who are interested in one of the two wouldn't be interested in the other part. Your thoughts? Fgnievinski (discuss • contribs) 14:59, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Matlab code that won't run in Octave
 * Octave code that won't run in Matlab

 * I agree with your comment on readers/users, but disagree about your proposal for the article. —DIV (120.17.98.150 (discuss) 06:29, 24 January 2019 (UTC))


text:
Wikibooks talk:Fair use policy/Archive1

Typos
"We suggest you to avoid fair use materials" needs to be fixed. 69.87.194.147 13:40, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Done (does this include something like what you were thinking of?).
 * While at it, I sort of rewrote the whole section. I believe I kept the same meaning, but feel free to comment if you disagree. --Swift 10:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Commons Images
I just want to put forward an idea right now, I am not necessarily suggesting that we try to do this any time soon. Several other wikimedia projects have banned all image uploads completely, and specify instead that all new images must be uploaded to commons. This would mean that the licensing and enforcing that licensing would be left up to the people at commons, and not be a task for us. If our policies on images are sufficiently similar to those at commons, i suggest we try something like that, because commons is simply better equipped to manage images then we are. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 19:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Are there any compelling reasons for keeping image uploads to WB? My understanding is that the differing Fair Use policies are/were an example of such a reason, but are there others?
 * Certainly, it is very convenient for all other projects (including non-English WB, potentially even translations of en-WB) to have the images we use available on Commons. Webaware talk 08:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Screenshots
G'day, I am fully supportive of the intention, but I am unclear about how this specifically relates to screenshots. My personal view is that screenshots are at times vital, or at a minimum, incredibly useful tools for instruction when talking about computer software packages. Often times, a picture tells a thousand words. But does this policy mean that screenshots of software under commercial copyright license cannot be be used in Wikibooks?

What are we to do about the screenshots already in use? For examples, please see Category:Fair use screenshots and subcategories.

I believe that a similar situation exists with Category:Logos. Webaware talk 02:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * That is true; is it possible to get permission from the owners of the program(s) to use them? I know at least that the MathWorks has a special setup for that purpose. WMF didn't make any explicit exceptions but that doesn't necessarily mean that they wouldn't be willing to make some, after all like I mentioned a lot of them do have uses that are difficult to fulfill without Fair Use unless we somehow obtain permission. Mattb112885 02:50, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I notice that has Category:Windows Screenshots, which seems to have some images showing bits of the Windows desktop. Commons refers to this document on screenshots and copyright, however, which appears to suggest that no screenshots of software under a copyright license would be acceptable, on Commons at least, without permission to distribute freely. I wonder what Microsoft would say? (will do some digging in their doco and website, to see whether the issue is addressed somewhere) Webaware talk 03:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * This sounds promising: Except for Microsoft product boot-up screens, opening screens, "splash screens," or screens from products that have not been commercially released (including beta versions), you may use screen shots in advertising, in documentation (including educational brochures), in tutorial books, in videotapes, or on Web sites, provided you adhere to the following guidelines: [...] 7. You must include the following copyright attribution statement: "Microsoft product screen shot(s) reprinted with permission from Microsoft Corporation." [...]
 * We'll need to make a template for Microsoft screenshots, at least. With any luck, other software companies will be so obliging. Webaware talk 03:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * That sounds promising indeed. I think it would be in most companies best interests to allow people to use screenshots for things like this, after all its like free advertising for them. Hopefully most companies are like microsoft/theMathWorks. Mattb112885 04:32, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 * —reset

I have created Microsoft screenshot for screenshots of Microsoft products, and will hopefully later create Microsoft logo for logos of Microsoft products. Please edit these as needed, as I am sure that my hack job is likely to be sub-standard! Webaware talk 07:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yay! _^_ A shiny new template. --Iamunknown 07:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Logos vs Icons
G'day, I looked into the abyss and the abyss looked back, so I backed off to let my poor brain recover somewhat. Maybe someone else can take a look and make some recommendations.

Microsoft have separate policies covering product icons and Microsoft logos. This makes sense, but also introduces complexities. It actually sounds to me like a big problem for us to use logos, but no problem for us to use product icons. Thus, we could create a licensing template for Microsoft product icons, and be very explicit about its use (i.e. not to be used for trademarked logos!) I strongly suspect that the same situation will apply for other software vendors, and that other trademarked logos (including most of these) will be unusable without Fair Use.

I'd appreciate it if someone else took a look at this and made some comments. I will proceed no further with this line of work until then. Webaware talk 08:58, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Reading both those pages, it looks like we would need product icons and Microsoft logos to be used under fair use. Remember that any material licensed under the GFDL (which is everything on this site, with the exception of images licensed otherwise) is subject to copying, editing, and redistribution as long as the GFDL license is preserved. There are, however, specific restrictions on use of product icons according to Microsoft's legal page. That does not go well with the GFDL. Granted, the use of product icons specifically in a contextual educational environment is okay -- which is good for us, because we will use them as such. On Wikipedia, for example, I would imagine a license being created for these product icons which would say, "For the purposes of Wikipedia, these icons are being used under fair use and must have an accompanying fair use rationale," because that is Wikipedia policy. We don't have a fully fleshed policy yet, so I don't know what I would consider as requirement for use of the icons. But I would support a policy akin to Wikipedia's. --Iamunknown 00:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It doesn't even sound as if it would be used per fair use, but rather it would be use of a copyrighted work, with permission of the copyright holder, because the sites says you can use it in a educatinal enviroment, like wikibooks, but that brings up an issue of wikibooks has permission to use it, but, oftne titmes someone might see it on here and think its "free content" and use it elsewhere without going to the image page and seeing the notice of the restrictions Microsoft has on their use. I am not sure how such could be delt with, without having to put a disclaimer in the caption for such images wherever they are used.RyanB88 00:31, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * But because we need to consider downstream use (due to the copy-edit-redistribute GFDL license) it would still need to be used under something akin (if not equal to) fair use. People could think that because everything on this site is GFDL'd that they can use these icons for any purpose, decorative or inappropriate. --Iamunknown 03:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * the problem I see with this is often if an image is posted on a WMF project it is assumed that it is under a free license and can be redistributed, however this is not the case with Microsoft Icons which are subject to copyright, but used with permission, I am not sure how that would work.71.217.206.24 00:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Exactly. But if we declared that we are using them in an educational environment, but one which anyone could grab the icons and legally use it anywhere else (including a non-educational environment), without permission under fair use, then that distinction would be obvious. --Iamunknown 03:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

 * See WB:COPY, and note that the footer on every page on WB says "All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License (see Copyrights for details)". I don't think we need to be as concerned about this as either of you suggest, as long as every image is correctly licensed and the license tags explain the situation sufficiently (including links to text backing up any claims). Webaware talk 03:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Move to Enforce/Reject
This policy proposal is succinct and will do a good deal to help keep us out of legal problems in the future. We should not be without some kind of policy on this matter, because fair use represents a dangerous fringe area of copyright law, one that is not accepted in many countries around the world. Containing fair use materials will make it difficult, if not completely illegal, to print or publish our works in many countries. However, not allowing fair use content will be very restrictive, and will reduce the quality (if only on a temporary basis) of some books, until suitable replacements for that content can be found. I propose that we act on this issue ASAP, and choose one of two options: I personally am inclined to say wikibooks would be better off without fair use materials, but considering that this proposal is well-written and sufficiently restrictive, i would be fine with it if people wanted to enforce this policy. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 22:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Accept and enforce this policy the way it currently stands, or with some alterations in text, but keeping the general meaning and spirit of the current version the same.
 * 2) Reject this policy and any rewording of it, instead opting to ban fair use content entirely. We would need to draft a replacement policy to ban such materials and move to enforce it.
 * Wow I had no idea about that message from WMF, that'll surely wreck some havoc in WP where basically every title image is listed under fair use. At least we should prevent too many of them from coming in here before we have the same predicament (even though it appears that most modules in WB don't rely as heavily on images as those on WP, except for some specific exceptions like Wikijunior books). I made some relatively minor changes to the text of the article, but I mean I agree that fair use should not be used in a project like this, IMO if you want to use an image use a free one\make your own, or get permission like real books do for images that they cannot otherwise print due to copyrights. Mattb112885 02:16, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree that we must choose either one proposal or the other. I think it would be feasible to craft policy that allowed for significantly limited (much more than is currently acceptable on either Wikibooks or on Wikipedia) use of media used without permission if it would be practically impossible to replace the media with a free media and also allowed for small textual quotations. --Iamunknown 07:56, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I would need to read up on the differences between properly cited textual quotations, and the use of text as "fair use". I believe that text can be reproduced in small quantities so long as it is properly cited, and not fall under the category of fair use. I think that fair use needs to be highly limited, at least to the point that we are as restrictive as the WMF is (if not more so). We cannot be less restrictive. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 19:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I hate to break the news here, but copying words without premission is a copyright violation, even if it is just a single word. When you do a quote, it is through fair use concepts that you can republish that quote.  A citation is just a way to justify why you are using the information and document that you know that the content you have copied is not your own, but you are using somebody else's words.  This is fair use at its most fundimental level.  --Rob Horning 21:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

title: Wikibooks talk:Fair use policy/Archive1


text:
User talk:85.100.27.188

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikibooks. Wikibooks is intended to be read without the need for external reference and requires content rather than external links particularly those which are for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links may include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikibooks. Thank you. Webaware talk 00:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:85.100.27.188


text: User:Archolman/sandbox

title: User:Archolman/sandbox


text:
C++ Programming/Editor's Missing contents

System Resources
 * Quick introduction to the Computer architecture (CPU, memory, registers, filesystem).
 * mention stack, heap their use and simple examples, remember to refer them in debugging to.

friend functions/member functions Functors (class type functor) Functors (template type functor) Portability
 * common issues, pitfalls, mistakes in writing portable code and solutions.

Random number generators
 * introduction, mention language default resources for the task and known alternatives.

CRC Cards
 * Introduction to CRC Cards

POSIX
 * C++ and POSIX
 * POSIX Threads

From 32 to 64 bits
 * mention Parkinson's law

Source Control

Creating Libraries Constraints Unit Testing

[ edit list above ]

|.


text:
Wikijunior:Bugs/Stinkbug

What does it look like?

Stink bugs are part of the superfamily Pentatomidae, the third largest family of true bugs. “Penta” refers to their five-segmented antennae. Stink bugs are also called shield bugs because their thick wing covers look like a shield. Shield bugs do not belong to the Penta group.

Many stink bug species are brown or green but some are bright red and easy to spot. They are usually 1/4-inch to 3/4-inch long. Predacious stink bugs belong to the subfamily Asopinae, in which the first segment of the beak is fat and directed away from the head. Plant-sucking stink bugs have a thinner beak, pressed under the head.

Adult stink bugs have scent glands which open on the thorax (midsection). They get their name from the foul smelling compounds discharged near the hind legs. Immature stink bugs usually have scent glands which open on the abdomen.

Common names, colors and shield designs vary depending on the species. The green vegetable bug or green stink bug is light green with three pale spots on the edge of its thorax. The forest bug has a rounded head and bands of black and orange on the sides of its abdomen. Its legs are a reddish color.

The harlequin stink bug is about 1/8-inch long. It has a distinctive red and black pattern on its broad shield. The immature nymphs are very colorful.

The green soldier bug is 1/2-inch to 3/4-inch long. Its shield is bright green with yellow, orange or reddish edges. The nymph stage has an oval-shaped, green body with yellow and black markings.

The conspicuous stink bug is 1/4-inch to 5/8-inch long. Its shield is shiny blue-black with an orange band that may surround two black spots. The anchor bug has an unusual red-orange anchor shape on its shield

Where does it live?
Stink bugs are found throughout the world. Two-spotted stink bugs are found east of the Rocky Mountains in the United States and Canada. They live in fields and meadows. They are commonly seen on exposed plant surfaces such as stems and leaves. The green soldier bug is found throughout North America in crop fields, orchards, and gardens.

What does it eat?
Stink bugs are sap-suckers that feed on a wide variety of vegetation. About two-thirds of stink bug species are plant feeders (sometimes pests). Some species feed on both plants and animals or start life feeding on plants and later become predators. Some predatory stink bugs suck the juices of caterpillars and beetle larvae.

Green soldier bugs feed on plant juices from leaves, flowers, and fruits. Two-spotted stink bugs suck juices from weeds. Forest bugs feed on deciduous trees, like oaks and maples. Harlequin stink bugs attack cabbage, cauliflower, turnips and other vegetable crops.

How does it defend itself?
When they are disturbed they emit a strong defensive smell from their scent glands. The smell comes from cyanide compounds having a rancid almond scent. They have little need to hide because their foul smell keeps predators at a distance. The bad odor serves as a kind of chemical alarm for friends and a deterrent for enemies.

Their slow movement may help them avoid attention of predators. They do not bite, but if held tightly they may use piercing mouthparts to stab a hand. Their eggs may have spines for protection.

What stages of metamorphosis does it go through?
Stink bugs belong to the Order Hemiptera so they undergo incomplete metamorphosis. There is no pupal stage between the larval phase and the adult phase. The young nymphs resemble adults but have no wings.

Adults usually hibernate in winter and begin laying eggs in late spring or early summer. Females lay clusters of barrel-shaped eggs on plants. The clusters are stuck to each other and to flowers or leaves by a sticky substance. Nymphs feed throughout the summer.

Many nymphs are herbivores at first, but later become predators or omnivores. They molt to adults in late summer. One or two generations hatch each year. A few species guard the eggs until they hatch, and even take care of the young nymphs.

What special behavior does it exhibit?
Stink bugs move very slowly. Their slow movement, especially in the early morning, makes them easy to harvest, like a crop. In some cultures, stink bugs are used to add flavor to stews, or eaten for their own sake.

The predatory spined soldier bugs are often seen sitting on leaves or flowers with caterpillars impaled on their outstretched beaks.

How does this bug affect people?
The plant-sucking stink bugs include crop-damaging pests, such as the Southern Green Stink Bug and the Harlequin Bug. The green stink bug is a pest of fruit, vegetables, and grains. The green soldier bug damages fruit trees, soybeans, cotton, and corn.

About a third of North American stink bugs are beneficial predators of caterpillars and other harmful insects. The anchor bug, for example, preys on Mexican bean beetles and Japanese beetles.

Species with big shoulder spines prey on tent caterpillars and webworms. Their spines go right through the protective walls of the shelters to impale the prey. Some predacious stink bugs have enormous appetites for crop pests. An adult two-spotted stink bug can destroy 150 to 200 Colorado potato beetle larvae over the course of its life.

title: Wikijunior:Bugs/Stinkbug


text:
Talk:GBA Development

Copyright notice
This content was originally found at http://www.myplanet.net/banazir/ written by Daniel R. Horning, and the author has agreed to have this content made available under the terms of the Gnu Free Document License. If formal licensing information and disclosure is required, you can contact me at my e-mail account (via the Wikibooks web interface) or drop a note on my talk page. --Rob Horning 02:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Expanding this book
Ehh... very good and descriptive way to start it off, but I think this should be just the beginning of the book. I suggest moving the current contents into a "Getting Started" chapter, and for the rest of the book, we can assume prior programming knowledge, and introduce everything the system is capable of. NinjaSkitch (talk) 06:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

merge
I suggest merging Gameboy Advance Programming into GBA Development. --DavidCary (talk) 02:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Old links, and no cross platform
the links to the SDK were giving me a 503 error... and from what I could tell all of this is windows specific... I don't know if there is a way to do this on linux but I would like to have learned that from the book on closer expection many of the links at the bottom of the page are broken as well Icallitvera (discuss • contribs) 20:36, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:GBA Development


text:
GBA Development/Source

 * 1) include

// Global variables int curX, curY, curColor; u8 cR, cG, cB;

//Function that draws a single pixel to the screen void drawPix(int xPos, int yPos, int color) {  unsigned short* videoBuffer = (unsigned short*)0x6000000; videoBuffer[(yPos*240) + xPos] = color; }

//Gets input from the joypad void query_input {     if (F_CTRLINPUT_UP_PRESSED) curY--; if (F_CTRLINPUT_DOWN_PRESSED) curY++; if (F_CTRLINPUT_LEFT_PRESSED) curX--; if (F_CTRLINPUT_RIGHT_PRESSED) curX++; if (F_CTRLINPUT_B_PRESSED) curColor = RGB(++cR, cG, cB); if (F_CTRLINPUT_A_PRESSED) curColor = RGB(cR, ++cG, cB); if (F_CTRLINPUT_L_PRESSED) curColor = RGB(cR, cG, ++cB); if (F_CTRLINPUT_R_PRESSED) {        cR = 0xFF; cG = 0xFF; cB = 0xFF; curColor = RGB(cR, cG, cB); }

}

// Function called every screen refresh void vbl_func {     query_input; drawPix(curX,curY, curColor); }

//Program entrance int main(void) {

// Initializing HAM and background mode ham_Init; ham_SetBgMode(3);

// Initializing global variables curX = 0; curY = 0; cR = 0xFF; cG = 0xFF; cB = 0xFF; curColor = 0xFFFF;

//Starts running the vbl_func every screen refresh ham_StartIntHandler(INT_TYPE_VBL,(void*)&vbl_func);

while(true) {  }   return 0; }

title: GBA Development/Source