foobar

In 0. 21 seconds, the first result is "Google Hash: md5(foobar) = 3858f62230ac3c915f300c664312c63f" .

秒内，第一个结果是“GoogleHash：md5（foobar）=3858f62230ac3c915f300c664312c63f”。

Therefore foobar 2000 is serious competitor to its commercial analogs.

因此,foobar2000是严重的竞争对手,其商业类似物.

To remove the ambiguity, you must explicitly tell the compiler which FooBar you want to create.

为了去掉不明确的引用，你必须明确地告诉编译器你到底要创建哪个。

Create a second database called foobar

创建第二个名为foobar的数据库

In other words, if you've supplied a value of "foobar" to the bearclaw attribute, it will get caught.

换句话说，如果您为bearclaw属性提供了一个值“foobar”，它就会被找出来。

For example, the control treatment's headline copy might be "Foobar is a great service! Sign up here. "

例如，控制条件的标题文本可能是：“Foobar是个很好的服务！在这里注册。”

Say we have a service called "Foobar" and we're conducting an experiment on our landing page.

假设我们有一项服务叫“Foobar”并且我们想在着陆页进行一次测试。

In other words, if you've supplied a value of "foobar" to the bearclaw attribute, it will get caught.

换句话说，如果您为bearclaw属性提供了一个值“foobar”，它就会被找出来。

Then as the value for a computed field you might code the following JavaScript (which displays foobar)

然后可以编写以下JavaScript（将显示foobar）作为computed字段的值

If the second group matched the string foo, for example, then passing the replacement string$ 2bar would cause foobar to be appended to the string buffer.

例如，如果第二个组与字符串foo相匹配，则传递替换字符串$2bar将导致foobar被附加到字符串缓冲区。

What point in the plane x X-axis is foobar y-axis ought to be foobass something else, right?

在平面中指向哪个点呢？，轴是foobar的？，does，p，now，point，to？，而y轴应该是其他一些foobass的，对不对？我知道这看起来像一个？

All said but i think some people will stick with foobar.

我想或者可能有些人坚持用foobar。

For example, take the MD5 hash of "foobar" : 3858f62230ac3c915f300c664312c63f.

举例来说，利用“foobar”的MD5散列：3858f62230ac3c915f300c664312c63f。

Create a second database called foobar

创建第二个名为foobar的数据库

I know, for a lot of you, it's like, OK, I got a heavy problem. Let's see, def Foobar open paren, a bunch of parameters.

我知道这对你们中的大多数人来说，应该没问题了，好，这儿我碰到了，一个严重的问题，我们看看，一堆参数。

In my opinion, at first 1. 6 a lot like foobar (1. 5) but lately i think yours is better for audiophile users.

在我的意见，首先1.6非常似foobar（1.5）但最后我认为你的（JEP）对音响用家较好。