Computing desk
< June 17	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	Current desk >

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

June 18

Python input integer

Consider this simple Python 3 input and calculation example:

 n = input("?")
 print(n*10)

On one computer, I input 7 and I get a response 7777777777. On another computer, I input 7 and I get 70. I believe that there is an issue with the input function. On the first computer, it stores 7 as a string. On the second, it stores 7 as an integer. Is one of those the correct way it should work? Is it purposely vague? 12.116.29.106 (talk) 12:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

input always returns a ~~(stripped)~~ string. So the 7777777777 behaviour is correct. If you wanted an integer, you'd have to call int on the result. I don't know where you're getting the 70 behaviour, and I can't reproduce that behaviour on python3.12 on Linux or 3.11 on Windows. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 13:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I figured out that the machine producing the 70 result has both Python 2 and Python 3. I assumed that typing "python" would use the latest version (3), but it uses the older version (2). So, it is perhaps an issue with Python 2 auto-casting the value to an integer. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 14:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I checked and input in Python 3 is raw_input in Python 2. If I change the function and run it in Python 2, I get the expected 7777777777 output. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 14:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I expected as much (but I couldn't find an online repl with python2 to allow me to check it). You should almost certainly uninstall the python2 installation, as it hasn't had a security patch since January 1st, 2020. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 14:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Download image from website

I found this scan of an old map and would like to download it completely in high resolution, but there seems to be no option to do that. I tried searching the source text of the page, I installed JDownloader, but I just cannot get the image file onto my computer. The only way I see is to make screenshots of tiny portions of the map, which would be quite tedious to begin with, and then somehow put them together, but I have no idea with what program to do even that. Is there a simple solution? --Abderitestatos (talk) 19:06, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I use this website a lot. Click on Image at the top center. Then, click on the name of the image on the upper right. Sign in and you can export the full resolution map image as a tiff. 75.136.148.8 (talk) 19:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I tried this last night, and now, about 12 hours later, the export is somehow still being processed. Is it normal that it takes that long? --Abderitestatos (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If the download is not working, most images have "Website" listed under the view panel (under the Compare button). That takes you to the website that is the source of the image. 75.136.148.8 (talk) 13:31, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With that link I get only the low resolution version, where almost nothing is readable. --Abderitestatos (talk) 23:16, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First click on "Compare" on the bottom right. Then click on "Document" on the popup in the top middle. That gets you a full-resolution version of the overlay map. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:47, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpgordon In what format is the full map downloaded? This has not worked for me. Philvoids (talk) 14:52, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still having trouble doing exactly that. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:39, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As all this does not seem to work, can instead anybody tell me how to easily puzzle together screenshots of the map's parts in a way that the result looks as good as if I had downloaded the original image as a whole? --Abderitestatos (talk) 15:51, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it were easy we'd already have figured it out. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is discussed at Image stitching with reference to drone-collected images. Here there is no reason why map patches collected manually at a high zoom level in lossless .bmp files could not be subsequently aligned together in seamless pixel-perfect manner. Philvoids (talk) 16:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that sounds great. What program would I use for that? --Abderitestatos (talk) 16:28, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned .bmp image files because Microsoft Paint on every Windows PC can save them after pasting after alt-PrtSc, and with a general-purpose programming language like "C" I can edit individual pixels. That doesn't mean that I have a fast algorithm to do the stitching. Philvoids (talk) 11:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried the "export to GEOTIFF" option a few days ago, and it told me "Export of version 2024-06-29 14:55:23 is being processed right now. After it's ready, we will inform you here and also by email." I'm still waiting. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 17:13, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the export stopped working dependably a couple months ago. I emailed the site admin, but I never received a response. 12.116.29.106 (talk) 14:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I'm actually a subscriber, but it never gave me the subscriber benefit (save more than one map); and conversation with the admin was pretty futile. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 15:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]