Computing desk
< July 17	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 19 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 18[edit]

Forwarded email treated as spam[edit]

I had a gmail account that I no longer plan to actively use, but I might still get important email from it, so I set it up to forward to the new account I plan to use. However, when using the new account, any email that is forwarded is sent to the spam folder. I've not been able to find a way to fix this, because I obviously can't add everyone who may send an email to that old account to the new accounts contact list. Does anyone know how I can fix this? Thanks! 67.164.156.42 (talk) 03:49, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The new account is also a gmail account? Looie496 (talk) 04:19, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. 67.164.156.42 (talk) 04:27, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The old Gmail account should trap any genuine spam, so just set up a filter on the new account to check for any mail forwarded from your old account and check the "never send it to spam" box.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:13, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How did you set up the forwarding? Via the gmail settings under 'Forwarding and POP/IMAP' (need to use web to access) and then confirming in the other gmail account? Nil Einne (talk) 08:07, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was assuming the OP was doing. Gmail's filters and forwarding are very flexible. I have lots of forwarding going on between Gmail accounts, including to a dummy Gmail account in case one of my "live" accounts is compromised.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:14, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but I'm pretty sure it's fairly abnormal for email forwarded from Gmail to Gmail to be marked as spam (well unless they were also marked as spam by the other account) which is why I think its worth checking. Nil Einne (talk) 15:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@Nil Einne, yes. The problem I seemed to have was that the emails appeared to come from whoever sent them originally, not the account it was forwarded from, so making a filter wouldn't do anything. In any case, I changed the setting allowing the new account to check the inbox of the previous one (using POP3, whatever that means), and that seems to be working. 67.164.156.42 (talk) 20:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you should be able to use the 'X-Forwarded-For' or 'X-Forwarded-To' to set up a filter. Having said that, as I said I'm pretty sure this shouldn't happen, it sounds to me like either there's something screwed up with your main accounts spam settings or there's some sort of bug. Nil Einne (talk) 13:39, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

/* Programming */ apache active message queueing on multiple servers[edit]

http://www.javablogging.com/simple-guide-to-java-message-service-jms-using-activemq/

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/overview-137943.html

Do you have a question? --Mr.98 (talk) 13:13, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

how to change search engine ?[edit]

How do I make bing or google my standard search engine ?

A programme i installed added another crappy search engine. When i saw it i uninstalled it, but the bing search engine i had is gone.. i have no idea how to get it back. Help ?

)

109.247.62.59 (talk) 18:45, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which browser are you using ? At least in Firefox, there's a down arrow in front of the search box which allows me to select which search engine I want. I'm not sure how to change which search engines are in that list, however. Another option is to change the browser's home page to the search engine of your choice, like http://www.google.com. Then, whenever you pop up a new tab or window, that search engine will come up. StuRat (talk) 21:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In Firefox: click the down arrow. Choose the last item: Manage search engines.

In Firefox II, for keywords that you type on the address bar: type about:config in the address bar, go to keyword.url, and put something like "https://duckduckgo.com/?q=" or whatever browser you want. OsmanRF34 (talk) 16:50, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interactive pages[edit]

How does facebook or other interactive pages works in the sense that when you click a link, not everything is reloaded but link (URI) of the browser changes, for example when you click an image in facebook everything goes dark, URI changes, but everthing you had behing stays there, you can go back by clicking the dark page, It's strange cause not everything is reloaded.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.158.212.204 (talk) 20:55, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

javascript 92.233.64.26 (talk) 21:16, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You might also find AJAX and DHTML informative. These technologies are very old; they've been around for almost as long as the web browser; the degree to which they are standardized, let alone "socially acceptable" amongst web designers, has ebbed and flowed. Nimur (talk) 21:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know with AJAX you can download content without refreshing the page but what I am asking is that, the link, the URI changes completely, for example... when you are on facebook and you are viewing group news the Url on the browser is something like this

http://www.facebook.com/groups/***something*** , when you click an image to view it, the url changes to https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=**imageid , Like if it actually went to another page, the thing is that the page before is still in the background dimmed lightly, css doesn't reload, javascript doesn't reload, images don't reload, part of the html doesn't reload (I know this by chrome developer tools). when you click back in the dark part you go back where you are, if you copy the url of the facebook image and you request it normally, it goes to a totally different page. 190.158.212.204 (talk) 22:31, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably seeing a trick-play, combining javascript, a cleverly-disguised iframe, and an HTML5-compliant browser history pushback to modify the contents of the URL bar. Many new browsers allow the web-page to modify the URL (or "combination"/"omni") text area. (Whether that's a good idea... has certainly been debated). Nimur (talk) 23:09, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look closely at the URL in the address box. Does it have a # in it? Your browser will only reload if the the address before the # is different. JavaScript can change the part after the # without triggering a new page load. If you copy the address from the address box or bookmark it and revisit in the future, the part after the # can be interpreted by JavaScript to reload the same overlays and such.

When you right-click on a link and copy its address, the browser copies the href attribute of the a tag. When you click a link, the browser obeys the onClick command of the same a tag, if there is one. This lets the site use JavaScript to load overlays and modify the # part of the URL when you click a link, but also lets the site specify an appropriate fallback page URL if you copy the link or choose to open it in a new tab.

I noticed Facebook uses #! in the URL. As a guess, I searched for hashbang URL and then hashbang URI and found pages talking about if this method is good or bad. For example, Hash URIs from the W3C Blog looks like an appropriate overview. --Bavi H (talk) 01:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see the page I linked to suggests you "use the HTML5 history API where you can". I read the page page Nimur linked to above, and if your browser uses HTML5, it looks like the JavaScript commands history.pushState(), history.replaceState(), the history.state variable, and the popstate event can be used to change the URL for similar purposes without loading a new page or needing to use a #. A "cleverly disguised iframe" doesn't seem to be needed: The example shown "will cause the URL bar to display http://mozilla.org/bar.html, but won't cause the browser to load bar.html or even check that bar.html exists." Thanks Nimur, I didn't know about those JavaScript commands before. --Bavi H (talk) 02:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just was I was looking for, thanks a lot. 65.49.68.173 (talk) 19:38, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Function syntax in jQuery[edit]

Can someone please tell me the meaning of the "$(function () {" syntax in jQuery? It makes a difference when I use unbind() on an element, so if I want to make something an "accordion" using jQuery ui, I have to put it inside this function declaration, like so:

$(function() {
		$("#instructions").accordion();
});

It works without the $(function() wrapper, but if I place an unbind() instruction somewhere else, the accordion functionality cannot be restored. Put the wrapper in, and the problem goes away. What's going on? Google hasn't helped me here, and a search for the literal "$(function()" on the jQuery website wasn't helping either IBE (talk) 22:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The outer wrapper says "here is an anonymous function - please call it when the page is loaded and the DOM is ready" - see this description. The inner function (the meat of that anonymous function) means (I think) "find the DOM object with id="instructions" and call its accordion method". According to the documentation for document.ready() it means the same as you have, so the following should be functionally the same:

$(document).ready(function(){
  $("#instructions").accordion();
});

The latter form seems to be more common in tutorials, but I don't know if working jQuery programmers would find one form clearer than the other. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 01:06, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, but it is already inside the main "document.ready" function - why should this make any difference? IBE (talk) 01:19, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]