.main-heading {   display: block;   font-family: "Josefin-Sans", sans-serif;   font-size: 70.6px;   font-weight: bold;   text-align: center;   color: #ba9a45; }  .subheading {   font-family: "Cardo", sans-serif;   font-size: 23.5px;   text-align: center;   color: #fff;   padding-top: 30px; } &lt;!-- Headings --&gt;  &lt;div&gt;   &lt;h1 class="main-heading"&gt;ATLANTIC&lt;/h1&gt;   &lt;h1 class="main-heading"&gt;CASINO&lt;/h1&gt;   &lt;h3 class="subheading"&gt;FEED YOUR DESIRES&lt;/h3&gt; &lt;/div&gt;    I seem to not be able to make my h1 and h3 background only as wide as the text and not span the whole width of the line. How can I reduce the background of the h1 and h3 so it only spans to the end of the text? -- I've managed to resolve my issue by taking into consideration all the advice given by users below. Have a look at my revised code which works: &lt;div class=&quot;title-headings&quot;&gt;   &lt;h1 class=&quot;main-heading&quot;&gt;ATLANTIC&lt;/h1&gt;   &lt;h1 class=&quot;main-heading&quot;&gt;CASINO&lt;/h1&gt;   &lt;h3 class=&quot;subheading&quot;&gt;FEED YOUR DESIRES&lt;/h3&gt; &lt;/div&gt;   .main-heading{   display: block;   margin-left: auto;   margin-right: auto;   width: max-content;   font-family: &quot;Josefin-Sans&quot;, sans-serif;   font-size: 70.6px;   font-weight: bold;   color: #ba9a45; }  .subheading{   display: block;   margin-left: auto;   margin-right: auto;   width: max-content;   font-family: &quot;Cardo&quot;, sans-serif;   font-size: 23.5px;   color: #fff;   padding-top: 30px; }
I have a layout similar to:  &lt;div&gt;     &lt;table&gt;     &lt;/table&gt; &lt;/div&gt;   I would like for the div to only expand to as wide as my table becomes.
When to use 'which' or 'in which' or 'that' (as relative pronouns)? Obtain screen status using ADB Why is the Java main method static? The method signature of a Java main() method is:  public static void main(String[] args){     ... }   Is there a reason for this method to be static? The use of the Axiom of Choice in this proof of the sequence lemma Internet Accounts spontaneously forgets passwords and I can't reauthorize them I've had this problem before, but I was able to resolve it that time. macOS 10.13.4, everything up to date. Yesterday, Internet Accounts forgot my LinkedIn password and would not reauthenticate. Today, it forgot my Facebook password.   I've tried:   App specific password. Removing the account and re-adding it. Turning off 2-factor authentication. Deleting associated entries from Keychain. Logging out of iCloud, deleting Keychain entries, removing and re-adding the account, then logging back in.   First of all, what the hell—why does this keep happening?! Secondly, what else can I do to fix this short of reinstalling macOS? Relationship between SVD and PCA. How to use SVD to perform PCA? $\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(u +n)^2}=\frac{\pi^2}{(\sin \pi u)^2}$ I've already see a  by Marko Riedel which I list it follows:     The standard way to treat these sums is to integrate   $$ f(z) = \frac{1}{(z+\alpha)^2} \pi \cot(\pi z)$$   along a contour consisting of a circle of radius $R$ and with $R$ going to infinity and hence being larger than $\alpha$, where the circle does not pass through the poles on the real axis.   Now along the semicircle in the upper half plane we have   $$|f(z)| \le \frac{1}{(R-|\alpha|)^2}\pi \left|\frac{e^{i\pi R\exp(i\theta)} + e^{-i\pi R\exp(i\theta)}} {e^{i\pi R\exp(i\theta)} - e^{-i\pi R\exp(i\theta)}}\right|= \frac{1}{(R-|\alpha|)^2} \pi  \left|\frac{e^{2i\pi R\exp(i\theta)}+1}{e^{2i\pi R\exp(i\theta)}-1}\right| &lt; \frac{1}{(R-|\alpha|)^2} \pi   \frac{1+e^{-2\pi R\sin(\theta)}e^{2i\pi R\cos(\theta)}} {1-e^{-2\pi R\sin(\theta)}e^{2i\pi R\cos(\theta)}}$$   This last term is clearly $O(1/R^2)$ as $R$ goes to infinity as the quotient of the two exponentials goes to one since $\exp(-R)$ vanishes and there is no singularity when $\theta = 0$ or $\theta = \pi$ as $R\cos\theta = \pm R$, which is not an integer by the assumption that the circle avoids the poles and hence cannot be one.     My question: It is clear that for each $z=Re^{i \theta}$ , $f(z)=O(1/R^2)$ ，but can this guarantee that the last term on RHS is uniform bounded ? Since $\theta$ varies on a compact interval $[0, \pi]$ , I want to show that for each $ \theta \in [0, \pi]$ , and a fixed positive number $M \gt 1 $ there exist an open ball contains $\theta$ and a fixed $R_{\theta}\gt 0$ , for every $R \ge R_{\theta}$ and $x \in $ the open ball $$\frac{1+e^{-2\pi R\sin(x)}e^{2i\pi R\cos(x)}} {1-e^{-2\pi R\sin(x)}e^{2i\pi R\cos(x)}} \le M$$  For $\theta \neq 0,\pi$ , it is easy to find the desired $R_{\theta}$ and the open ball , but if $\theta = 0$ or $ \theta = \pi$ , for every open ball containing $\theta$ , it behave erratically near $\theta$ , I have no idea how to deal with this . Is it possible to know the (public) IP address of a computer where TeamViewer is ready for a remote control session - without connecting to the computer? I am asked to prove this theorem:  If $f:U \rightarrow C$ is holomorphic in $U$ and invertible, $P\in U$ and if $D(P,r)$ is a sufficently small disc about P, then   $$f^{-1}(w) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \oint_{\partial D(P,r)}{\frac{sf'(s)}{f(s)-w}}ds$$     The book says to "imitate the proof of the argument principle" but I am not seeing the connection. If $U_1$, $U_2,\ldots,U_n$ are proper subspaces of a vector space $V$ over a field $F$, and $|F|\gt n-1$, why is $V$ not equal to the union of the subspaces $U_1$, $U_2,\ldots,U_n$? Why is $2\pi i \neq 0?$ We know that $e^{\pi i} = -1$ because of de Moivre's formula. ($e^{\pi i} = \cos \pi + i\sin \pi = -1).$  Suppose we square both sides and get $e^{2\pi i} = 1$(which you also get from de Moivre's formula), then shouldn't $2\pi i=0$? What am I missing here? Here are two sentences:        Once he got the passport, he went to the Chinese consulate in Toronto and applied for a visa.   Once he got the passport, he went to the Chinese consulate in Toronto to apply for a visa.      Are the two sentences grammatical, and do they sound natural?  If they are both fine, what's the difference? What are the fundamental differences between the mainstream *NIX shells and what scenarios might prompt you to use one over the other?  I understand that some of it probably comes down to user preference but I've only ever used Bash and I'm interested to hear where another shell might be useful. Also, is there an impact on user-written shell scripts when running under one shell or another or is it simply a matter of changing the shell at the top of the file?  My instinct says it's not that easy. Modify footer used by elsarticle.cls Fractions with large elements What is best practice for typesetting fractions with large objects in the numerator and denominator?  For example, fractions with limits, integrals, summations, etc... cause the expressions to look contracted and somewhat odd.  I understand that it is probably best to leave this as is when writing mathematics inline, but as a stand-alone fraction I feel it would be much less distracting if the symbols were typeset at normal size and the fraction was given more height in which to place itself.  Are there standards (for pure mathematics) regarding this problem? And what are the options - if it's generally permitted - for expanding the fraction size to incorporate large objects?    Example  \frac{\sum_{i=0}^{n} i^2}{\iint_{D}\frac{\partial (x,y)}{\partial (u,v)}\,\mathrm{d}u\,\mathrm{d}v}   Both the summation and the integral look somewhat cramped. How to typeset row operations on augmented matrix I would like to typeset row operations on a augmented matrix, but the "gauss"-package does not seem to support the vertical line just before the last column, any way to do this?  Thanks! The sentence     Women driving cars is, of course, such a foreign sight to a society like   Saudi Arabia   The subject is not "women" (otherwise, the verb would have been 'are'); the subject, as I mean to use it, is the rarity of seeing women driving cars. The subject, in other words, is "women driving cars" as a thing. Does this give me licence to use 'is' here? Thank you. Is there a reason to use multiple question marks instead of an asterisk in filename expansion? If I have a number of directories, named, for example 10001 through 10025 is there any reason to use ls 1*/foo vs. ls 100??/foo?  I have a lot more than 25 of them, so I mostly curious if there's any differences in speed.  I know the difference in use between the two, that the asterisk will match longer file names, like 10001.backup. But let's say I don't have any files that don't follow my conventions. Is there any behind-the-scenes differences? How to find files that contain one criterion but exclude a different criterion Finitely generated projective module