Grep complete name including dot in the wordCan grep output only specified groupings that match?How to do a grep on remote machine and print out the line which contains those words?How to parse table for pattern if pattern includes spacespassing the results of awk command as a parameterProblem with grep -ogrep command to match the character requiredHow to `grep -v` and also exclude 'n' lines after the match?Browse directory and extract word from folder nameExtract lines from files containing a string but not another in that same lineGrep complete name including dot in pattern

Why was the Sega Genesis marketed as a 16-bit console?

Why is one of Madera Municipal's runways labelled with only "R" on both sides?

Watts vs. Volt Amps

Russian equivalents of "no love lost"

Find the Factorial From the Given Prime Relationship

Is it possible to 'live off the sea'

What is the actual quality of machine translations?

Genetic limitations to learn certain instruments

Can an Aarakocra use a shield while flying?

Investing in a Roth IRA with a Personal Loan?

When conversion from Integer to Single may lose precision

Payment instructions allegedly from HomeAway look fishy to me

Does an ice chest packed full of frozen food need ice?

How does an ordinary object become radioactive?

What makes Ada the language of choice for the ISS's safety-critical systems?

At what point in time did Dumbledore ask Snape for this favor?

How to project 3d image in the planes xy, xz, yz?

"You've got another thing coming" - translation into French

PhD - Well known professor or well known school?

What can plausibly explain many of my very long and low-tech bridges?

Using "subway" as name for London Underground?

Trapping Rain Water

Is the term 'open source' a trademark?

An average heaven where everyone has sexless golden bodies and is bored



Grep complete name including dot in the word


Can grep output only specified groupings that match?How to do a grep on remote machine and print out the line which contains those words?How to parse table for pattern if pattern includes spacespassing the results of awk command as a parameterProblem with grep -ogrep command to match the character requiredHow to `grep -v` and also exclude 'n' lines after the match?Browse directory and extract word from folder nameExtract lines from files containing a string but not another in that same lineGrep complete name including dot in pattern






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








3















In a ksh shell script I am using a grep command to get a specific word as shown below.



$ cat file.txt
abc xyzdef.123 def.jkl mnopqrst

$ grep -o "wdefw" file.txt
xyzdef
def


I want output to be xyzdef.123 and def.jkl



It is not fetching the value after . Is there any other way to grep this word also I don't know the exact word to grep only I know a pattern. I am working on ksh shell.










share|improve this question






























    3















    In a ksh shell script I am using a grep command to get a specific word as shown below.



    $ cat file.txt
    abc xyzdef.123 def.jkl mnopqrst

    $ grep -o "wdefw" file.txt
    xyzdef
    def


    I want output to be xyzdef.123 and def.jkl



    It is not fetching the value after . Is there any other way to grep this word also I don't know the exact word to grep only I know a pattern. I am working on ksh shell.










    share|improve this question


























      3












      3








      3








      In a ksh shell script I am using a grep command to get a specific word as shown below.



      $ cat file.txt
      abc xyzdef.123 def.jkl mnopqrst

      $ grep -o "wdefw" file.txt
      xyzdef
      def


      I want output to be xyzdef.123 and def.jkl



      It is not fetching the value after . Is there any other way to grep this word also I don't know the exact word to grep only I know a pattern. I am working on ksh shell.










      share|improve this question
















      In a ksh shell script I am using a grep command to get a specific word as shown below.



      $ cat file.txt
      abc xyzdef.123 def.jkl mnopqrst

      $ grep -o "wdefw" file.txt
      xyzdef
      def


      I want output to be xyzdef.123 and def.jkl



      It is not fetching the value after . Is there any other way to grep this word also I don't know the exact word to grep only I know a pattern. I am working on ksh shell.







      shell-script text-processing grep






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited May 29 at 8:16









      terdon

      136k33276457




      136k33276457










      asked May 29 at 4:42









      ArnavArnav

      212




      212




















          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4














          Looks like you just want the string def and all non-whitespace characters around it. If so, you can use:



          $ grep -Eo 'S*defS*' file.txt 
          xyzdef.123
          def.jkl


          The S means non-whitespace and is supported by GNU grep with either the -E or -P flags.






          share|improve this answer























          • Actually this seems to be recognized in GNU grep by default (i.e., without options like -E or -P).

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:01











          • @Scott huh, so it is. Even busybox grep seems to grok S. Still, it isn't in the BRE so better safe than sorry.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 18:05


















          4














          Using grep -o and POSIX character classes:



          grep -o '[^[:blank:]]*def[^[:blank:]]*' file.txt


          This is essentially what terdon suggests, albeit using slightly different syntax (and no -E). This would match the string def and any non-blank characters on either side of that string (a non-blank character is a character that is not a space or a tab).



          Alternatively,



          tr '[:blank:]' 'n' <file | grep -F 'def'


          This just breaks the line down into multiple lines, one line per blank-separated word (where a "blank" is a tab or a space character). Then it applies a plain string match with grep -F on the generated lines to find the ones that you're interested in.




          Your pattern, wdefw, which with GNU grep, if using POSIX character class names, is the same as [[:alnum:]_]def[[:alnum:]_], requires that the string def is flanked by a alphanumeric character or underscore on either side. A dot is neither an alphanumeric character nor an underscore.



          The pattern also would not match def if it occurs at the very start or end of a line.






          share|improve this answer

























          • tr ' t' 'n'  would be more bullet-resistant.

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:04











          • @Scott Thanks, modified it in that direction.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 18:07


















          3














          With the attempt you have, you can't match the whole word to be returned. The -o flag of grep only returns the matched regex portion defined. Also w is not a POSIX defined extension for grep and might be available only in the GNU versions which support the PCRE syntax. On which you could do



          grep -oP '(w*)def[.](w*)'


          The -P flag turns on the PCRE regex mode in GNU grep and the -o flag returns the whole word matched the regex defined. The regex is translated as match zero or more number of alphanumeric characters followed by def and a literal . ( enclosed in a bracket expression ) and followed by zero or more number of alphanumeric characters.



          Using POSIX character classes for alphanumeric characters would be doing below. But remember the flag -o is still a GNU extension



          grep -o '([[:alnum:]]*)def[.]([[:alnum:]]*)' 





          share|improve this answer

























          • Instead of [.], better use . for a literal dot

            – Philippos
            May 29 at 8:10






          • 1





            The -E flag for grep, at least on GNU grep, also supports w.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 8:25






          • 1





            The only thing with this is that it requires the dot to be there, so it would not match the lone word def. However, I'm uncertain this is an issue for the questioner.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 9:10












          • @Kusalananda: Agreed, OP says including the . in the word, I assumed in the positive cases def is always present with the .

            – Inian
            May 29 at 9:13






          • 1





            @Philippos:  Why do you say . is better than [.]?

            – Scott
            May 29 at 17:58











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "106"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f521663%2fgrep-complete-name-including-dot-in-the-word%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes








          3 Answers
          3






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4














          Looks like you just want the string def and all non-whitespace characters around it. If so, you can use:



          $ grep -Eo 'S*defS*' file.txt 
          xyzdef.123
          def.jkl


          The S means non-whitespace and is supported by GNU grep with either the -E or -P flags.






          share|improve this answer























          • Actually this seems to be recognized in GNU grep by default (i.e., without options like -E or -P).

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:01











          • @Scott huh, so it is. Even busybox grep seems to grok S. Still, it isn't in the BRE so better safe than sorry.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 18:05















          4














          Looks like you just want the string def and all non-whitespace characters around it. If so, you can use:



          $ grep -Eo 'S*defS*' file.txt 
          xyzdef.123
          def.jkl


          The S means non-whitespace and is supported by GNU grep with either the -E or -P flags.






          share|improve this answer























          • Actually this seems to be recognized in GNU grep by default (i.e., without options like -E or -P).

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:01











          • @Scott huh, so it is. Even busybox grep seems to grok S. Still, it isn't in the BRE so better safe than sorry.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 18:05













          4












          4








          4







          Looks like you just want the string def and all non-whitespace characters around it. If so, you can use:



          $ grep -Eo 'S*defS*' file.txt 
          xyzdef.123
          def.jkl


          The S means non-whitespace and is supported by GNU grep with either the -E or -P flags.






          share|improve this answer













          Looks like you just want the string def and all non-whitespace characters around it. If so, you can use:



          $ grep -Eo 'S*defS*' file.txt 
          xyzdef.123
          def.jkl


          The S means non-whitespace and is supported by GNU grep with either the -E or -P flags.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered May 29 at 8:24









          terdonterdon

          136k33276457




          136k33276457












          • Actually this seems to be recognized in GNU grep by default (i.e., without options like -E or -P).

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:01











          • @Scott huh, so it is. Even busybox grep seems to grok S. Still, it isn't in the BRE so better safe than sorry.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 18:05

















          • Actually this seems to be recognized in GNU grep by default (i.e., without options like -E or -P).

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:01











          • @Scott huh, so it is. Even busybox grep seems to grok S. Still, it isn't in the BRE so better safe than sorry.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 18:05
















          Actually this seems to be recognized in GNU grep by default (i.e., without options like -E or -P).

          – Scott
          May 29 at 18:01





          Actually this seems to be recognized in GNU grep by default (i.e., without options like -E or -P).

          – Scott
          May 29 at 18:01













          @Scott huh, so it is. Even busybox grep seems to grok S. Still, it isn't in the BRE so better safe than sorry.

          – terdon
          May 29 at 18:05





          @Scott huh, so it is. Even busybox grep seems to grok S. Still, it isn't in the BRE so better safe than sorry.

          – terdon
          May 29 at 18:05













          4














          Using grep -o and POSIX character classes:



          grep -o '[^[:blank:]]*def[^[:blank:]]*' file.txt


          This is essentially what terdon suggests, albeit using slightly different syntax (and no -E). This would match the string def and any non-blank characters on either side of that string (a non-blank character is a character that is not a space or a tab).



          Alternatively,



          tr '[:blank:]' 'n' <file | grep -F 'def'


          This just breaks the line down into multiple lines, one line per blank-separated word (where a "blank" is a tab or a space character). Then it applies a plain string match with grep -F on the generated lines to find the ones that you're interested in.




          Your pattern, wdefw, which with GNU grep, if using POSIX character class names, is the same as [[:alnum:]_]def[[:alnum:]_], requires that the string def is flanked by a alphanumeric character or underscore on either side. A dot is neither an alphanumeric character nor an underscore.



          The pattern also would not match def if it occurs at the very start or end of a line.






          share|improve this answer

























          • tr ' t' 'n'  would be more bullet-resistant.

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:04











          • @Scott Thanks, modified it in that direction.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 18:07















          4














          Using grep -o and POSIX character classes:



          grep -o '[^[:blank:]]*def[^[:blank:]]*' file.txt


          This is essentially what terdon suggests, albeit using slightly different syntax (and no -E). This would match the string def and any non-blank characters on either side of that string (a non-blank character is a character that is not a space or a tab).



          Alternatively,



          tr '[:blank:]' 'n' <file | grep -F 'def'


          This just breaks the line down into multiple lines, one line per blank-separated word (where a "blank" is a tab or a space character). Then it applies a plain string match with grep -F on the generated lines to find the ones that you're interested in.




          Your pattern, wdefw, which with GNU grep, if using POSIX character class names, is the same as [[:alnum:]_]def[[:alnum:]_], requires that the string def is flanked by a alphanumeric character or underscore on either side. A dot is neither an alphanumeric character nor an underscore.



          The pattern also would not match def if it occurs at the very start or end of a line.






          share|improve this answer

























          • tr ' t' 'n'  would be more bullet-resistant.

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:04











          • @Scott Thanks, modified it in that direction.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 18:07













          4












          4








          4







          Using grep -o and POSIX character classes:



          grep -o '[^[:blank:]]*def[^[:blank:]]*' file.txt


          This is essentially what terdon suggests, albeit using slightly different syntax (and no -E). This would match the string def and any non-blank characters on either side of that string (a non-blank character is a character that is not a space or a tab).



          Alternatively,



          tr '[:blank:]' 'n' <file | grep -F 'def'


          This just breaks the line down into multiple lines, one line per blank-separated word (where a "blank" is a tab or a space character). Then it applies a plain string match with grep -F on the generated lines to find the ones that you're interested in.




          Your pattern, wdefw, which with GNU grep, if using POSIX character class names, is the same as [[:alnum:]_]def[[:alnum:]_], requires that the string def is flanked by a alphanumeric character or underscore on either side. A dot is neither an alphanumeric character nor an underscore.



          The pattern also would not match def if it occurs at the very start or end of a line.






          share|improve this answer















          Using grep -o and POSIX character classes:



          grep -o '[^[:blank:]]*def[^[:blank:]]*' file.txt


          This is essentially what terdon suggests, albeit using slightly different syntax (and no -E). This would match the string def and any non-blank characters on either side of that string (a non-blank character is a character that is not a space or a tab).



          Alternatively,



          tr '[:blank:]' 'n' <file | grep -F 'def'


          This just breaks the line down into multiple lines, one line per blank-separated word (where a "blank" is a tab or a space character). Then it applies a plain string match with grep -F on the generated lines to find the ones that you're interested in.




          Your pattern, wdefw, which with GNU grep, if using POSIX character class names, is the same as [[:alnum:]_]def[[:alnum:]_], requires that the string def is flanked by a alphanumeric character or underscore on either side. A dot is neither an alphanumeric character nor an underscore.



          The pattern also would not match def if it occurs at the very start or end of a line.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited May 29 at 18:06

























          answered May 29 at 9:08









          KusalanandaKusalananda

          149k18283471




          149k18283471












          • tr ' t' 'n'  would be more bullet-resistant.

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:04











          • @Scott Thanks, modified it in that direction.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 18:07

















          • tr ' t' 'n'  would be more bullet-resistant.

            – Scott
            May 29 at 18:04











          • @Scott Thanks, modified it in that direction.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 18:07
















          tr ' t' 'n'  would be more bullet-resistant.

          – Scott
          May 29 at 18:04





          tr ' t' 'n'  would be more bullet-resistant.

          – Scott
          May 29 at 18:04













          @Scott Thanks, modified it in that direction.

          – Kusalananda
          May 29 at 18:07





          @Scott Thanks, modified it in that direction.

          – Kusalananda
          May 29 at 18:07











          3














          With the attempt you have, you can't match the whole word to be returned. The -o flag of grep only returns the matched regex portion defined. Also w is not a POSIX defined extension for grep and might be available only in the GNU versions which support the PCRE syntax. On which you could do



          grep -oP '(w*)def[.](w*)'


          The -P flag turns on the PCRE regex mode in GNU grep and the -o flag returns the whole word matched the regex defined. The regex is translated as match zero or more number of alphanumeric characters followed by def and a literal . ( enclosed in a bracket expression ) and followed by zero or more number of alphanumeric characters.



          Using POSIX character classes for alphanumeric characters would be doing below. But remember the flag -o is still a GNU extension



          grep -o '([[:alnum:]]*)def[.]([[:alnum:]]*)' 





          share|improve this answer

























          • Instead of [.], better use . for a literal dot

            – Philippos
            May 29 at 8:10






          • 1





            The -E flag for grep, at least on GNU grep, also supports w.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 8:25






          • 1





            The only thing with this is that it requires the dot to be there, so it would not match the lone word def. However, I'm uncertain this is an issue for the questioner.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 9:10












          • @Kusalananda: Agreed, OP says including the . in the word, I assumed in the positive cases def is always present with the .

            – Inian
            May 29 at 9:13






          • 1





            @Philippos:  Why do you say . is better than [.]?

            – Scott
            May 29 at 17:58















          3














          With the attempt you have, you can't match the whole word to be returned. The -o flag of grep only returns the matched regex portion defined. Also w is not a POSIX defined extension for grep and might be available only in the GNU versions which support the PCRE syntax. On which you could do



          grep -oP '(w*)def[.](w*)'


          The -P flag turns on the PCRE regex mode in GNU grep and the -o flag returns the whole word matched the regex defined. The regex is translated as match zero or more number of alphanumeric characters followed by def and a literal . ( enclosed in a bracket expression ) and followed by zero or more number of alphanumeric characters.



          Using POSIX character classes for alphanumeric characters would be doing below. But remember the flag -o is still a GNU extension



          grep -o '([[:alnum:]]*)def[.]([[:alnum:]]*)' 





          share|improve this answer

























          • Instead of [.], better use . for a literal dot

            – Philippos
            May 29 at 8:10






          • 1





            The -E flag for grep, at least on GNU grep, also supports w.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 8:25






          • 1





            The only thing with this is that it requires the dot to be there, so it would not match the lone word def. However, I'm uncertain this is an issue for the questioner.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 9:10












          • @Kusalananda: Agreed, OP says including the . in the word, I assumed in the positive cases def is always present with the .

            – Inian
            May 29 at 9:13






          • 1





            @Philippos:  Why do you say . is better than [.]?

            – Scott
            May 29 at 17:58













          3












          3








          3







          With the attempt you have, you can't match the whole word to be returned. The -o flag of grep only returns the matched regex portion defined. Also w is not a POSIX defined extension for grep and might be available only in the GNU versions which support the PCRE syntax. On which you could do



          grep -oP '(w*)def[.](w*)'


          The -P flag turns on the PCRE regex mode in GNU grep and the -o flag returns the whole word matched the regex defined. The regex is translated as match zero or more number of alphanumeric characters followed by def and a literal . ( enclosed in a bracket expression ) and followed by zero or more number of alphanumeric characters.



          Using POSIX character classes for alphanumeric characters would be doing below. But remember the flag -o is still a GNU extension



          grep -o '([[:alnum:]]*)def[.]([[:alnum:]]*)' 





          share|improve this answer















          With the attempt you have, you can't match the whole word to be returned. The -o flag of grep only returns the matched regex portion defined. Also w is not a POSIX defined extension for grep and might be available only in the GNU versions which support the PCRE syntax. On which you could do



          grep -oP '(w*)def[.](w*)'


          The -P flag turns on the PCRE regex mode in GNU grep and the -o flag returns the whole word matched the regex defined. The regex is translated as match zero or more number of alphanumeric characters followed by def and a literal . ( enclosed in a bracket expression ) and followed by zero or more number of alphanumeric characters.



          Using POSIX character classes for alphanumeric characters would be doing below. But remember the flag -o is still a GNU extension



          grep -o '([[:alnum:]]*)def[.]([[:alnum:]]*)' 






          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited May 29 at 5:02

























          answered May 29 at 4:55









          InianInian

          6,2901734




          6,2901734












          • Instead of [.], better use . for a literal dot

            – Philippos
            May 29 at 8:10






          • 1





            The -E flag for grep, at least on GNU grep, also supports w.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 8:25






          • 1





            The only thing with this is that it requires the dot to be there, so it would not match the lone word def. However, I'm uncertain this is an issue for the questioner.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 9:10












          • @Kusalananda: Agreed, OP says including the . in the word, I assumed in the positive cases def is always present with the .

            – Inian
            May 29 at 9:13






          • 1





            @Philippos:  Why do you say . is better than [.]?

            – Scott
            May 29 at 17:58

















          • Instead of [.], better use . for a literal dot

            – Philippos
            May 29 at 8:10






          • 1





            The -E flag for grep, at least on GNU grep, also supports w.

            – terdon
            May 29 at 8:25






          • 1





            The only thing with this is that it requires the dot to be there, so it would not match the lone word def. However, I'm uncertain this is an issue for the questioner.

            – Kusalananda
            May 29 at 9:10












          • @Kusalananda: Agreed, OP says including the . in the word, I assumed in the positive cases def is always present with the .

            – Inian
            May 29 at 9:13






          • 1





            @Philippos:  Why do you say . is better than [.]?

            – Scott
            May 29 at 17:58
















          Instead of [.], better use . for a literal dot

          – Philippos
          May 29 at 8:10





          Instead of [.], better use . for a literal dot

          – Philippos
          May 29 at 8:10




          1




          1





          The -E flag for grep, at least on GNU grep, also supports w.

          – terdon
          May 29 at 8:25





          The -E flag for grep, at least on GNU grep, also supports w.

          – terdon
          May 29 at 8:25




          1




          1





          The only thing with this is that it requires the dot to be there, so it would not match the lone word def. However, I'm uncertain this is an issue for the questioner.

          – Kusalananda
          May 29 at 9:10






          The only thing with this is that it requires the dot to be there, so it would not match the lone word def. However, I'm uncertain this is an issue for the questioner.

          – Kusalananda
          May 29 at 9:10














          @Kusalananda: Agreed, OP says including the . in the word, I assumed in the positive cases def is always present with the .

          – Inian
          May 29 at 9:13





          @Kusalananda: Agreed, OP says including the . in the word, I assumed in the positive cases def is always present with the .

          – Inian
          May 29 at 9:13




          1




          1





          @Philippos:  Why do you say . is better than [.]?

          – Scott
          May 29 at 17:58





          @Philippos:  Why do you say . is better than [.]?

          – Scott
          May 29 at 17:58

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f521663%2fgrep-complete-name-including-dot-in-the-word%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Category:9 (number) SubcategoriesMedia in category "9 (number)"Navigation menuUpload mediaGND ID: 4485639-8Library of Congress authority ID: sh85091979ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

          Circuit construction for execution of conditional statements using least significant bitHow are two different registers being used as “control”?How exactly is the stated composite state of the two registers being produced using the $R_zz$ controlled rotations?Efficiently performing controlled rotations in HHLWould this quantum algorithm implementation work?How to prepare a superposed states of odd integers from $1$ to $sqrtN$?Why is this implementation of the order finding algorithm not working?Circuit construction for Hamiltonian simulationHow can I invert the least significant bit of a certain term of a superposed state?Implementing an oracleImplementing a controlled sum operation

          Magento 2 “No Payment Methods” in Admin New OrderHow to integrate Paypal Express Checkout with the Magento APIMagento 1.5 - Sales > Order > edit order and shipping methods disappearAuto Invoice Check/Money Order Payment methodAdd more simple payment methods?Shipping methods not showingWhat should I do to change payment methods if changing the configuration has no effects?1.9 - No Payment Methods showing upMy Payment Methods not Showing for downloadable/virtual product when checkout?Magento2 API to access internal payment methodHow to call an existing payment methods in the registration form?