Is there a valid version based on a constitution?

There are many versions for SAD (single attribute) characters, which can be further enhanced with the addition of some magic items, spells, and so on. However, I have not yet seen good SAD construction built around Constitution only, where the character is basically just a tank / defender character who can take a lot hits with a lot points of life, occasionally improving their health with care.

Reflecting on this, I told myself that the closest possible would be a barbarian hill dwarf of the Guardians of the Level 20 Ancestral Guardians, with feats of dwarf strength, robust and durable, with a maximum Constitution score, unprotected ( with a shield).

Basically, the goal is to use your attacks to lure your attackers towards you, focus on dealing with damage and occasionally use the Dodge action to heal you a bit by using your dice at Fortitude Dwarf). If anyone can come up with a better constitution-based construction, I'd like to hear it.

Oh, to note, I know that Moon Druid can be a great tank because of its high-level unlimited Wildshapes, but as this build does not necessarily have a high constitution, I do not think it's all about. do what I am. looking for.

How can I create a character designed only to maximize constitution?

tracing – 0 is not a valid variable

Your code poses some problems.

  1. It's an image, it would be much nicer not to have to rewrite it.
  2. plotting Series

    If you go to ref / Series / Application, you will see that Normal is used to draw a Series as otherwise O(x)^n will Plot confused.

  3. Definition of the function

    The functions are defined more or less like that f(x_):=... but if x is an argument for your function then Series spec {x,1,4} will become disabled as x will be replaced by the past value.

    You must create a series before passing the value. One way to do this is to create a series once and for all by doing it when defining: = against :=:

So, an "appropriate way" to get what you need is:

ClearAll(f);

f(x_) = Normal @ Series(E^(-x/4) Sin(3 x), {x, 1, 4})

Plot(f(x), {x, 0, 6})

enter the description of the image here

Coincidentally, your original code was about to work, if you know what's going on:

ClearAll(f);
f(x) := Series(E^(-x/4) Sin(3 x), {x, 1, 4})

Plot(Evaluate@Normal@f(x), {x, 0, 6})

But that's not a solution.

mac – Is there a way to remove valid files starting with a dot (.) in a tarball by generating false errors?

I have a compressed tar archive created on a Linux system that contains valid files in a directory beginning with dot (.).

When I extract this tar file to a Mac, tar thinks that the dotted file is a range of resources.

On linux:

# mkdir test_dir
# cd test_dir
# echo hello > ._SUCCESS.crc
# cd ..
# tar cvzf test_dir.tar.gz test_dir
test_dir/
test_dir/._SUCCESS.crc
# tar tf test_dir.tar.gz 
test_dir/
test_dir/._SUCCESS.crc

On the Mac:

$ tar xzf test_dir.tar.gz 
tar: copyfile unpack (test_dir/SUCCESS.crc) failed: No such file or directory
$ ls -la test_dir
total 8
drwxr-xr-x  4 xxxx  xxxx  128 Jul 31 16:31 .
drwxr-xr-x  4 xxxx  xxxx  128 Jul 31 16:31 ..
-rw-r--r--  1 xxxx  xxxx    6 Jul 31 16:22 ._SUCCESS.crc
-rw-r--r--  1 xxxx  xxxx    0 Jul 31 16:31 SUCCESS.crc

Is there a way to remove the belief that a given point file is a range of resources?

For the curious, this is part of a sequence file export from HDFS.

C # – I need help to refactor and make sure my design / structure is a) valid and b) the right one

I create a document conversion application. Ideally, it should be able to receive any file and reject it (not supported) or return a converted version (in most cases, convert from x to PDF). Some SharePoint features, such as downloading, downloading, versioning, and so on, will also be available later. I wanted to create a standard conversion method, but let the classes perform their own logic and their specific tasks, because the conversion logic can be very different for different types of files. I also wanted to make sure that one Document has a specific set of properties and methods (mainly to help with Sharepoint integration).

An example would be to take an existing Word document and return a PDF.

I'm not sure how to implement the part that decides which conversion class to use based on something like the file extension of the original document and the set of the document. application "feeling" a little wrong.

I am at a stage early enough to be able to change it if it needs to be changed significantly. I think I could confuse different design models, and then let myself be led to make bad decisions. I've provided a simplified version of the code below, which is identical to my own code, minus the Sharepoint content and some properties of some classes (just for readability).

Conversion abstract class

public abstract class Conversion
    {
        protected abstract IDocument Document { get; set; }
        protected abstract bool SaveDocumentLocal { get; set; }
        public Stream ConvertDocument()
        {
            BeforeConvert();
            var conv = Convert();
            if (SaveDocumentLocal)
            {
                this.SaveLocally(conv);
            }
            return conv;
        }

        protected virtual void BeforeConvert() { }
        protected virtual Stream Convert() { return new MemoryStream(); }
        protected virtual void SaveLocally(Stream doc) { }
    }

IDocument interface

public interface IDocument
        {
        string Url { get; set; }
        string LocalPath { get; set; }
        int MinorVersion { get; }
        int MajorVersion { get; }
        DateTime CreateDate { get; set; }
        void SetVersion(int minor, int major);
        }

Document class

public class Document : IDocument
        {
        public string Url { get; set; }
        public string LocalPath { get; set; }
        public int MinorVersion { get; private set; }
        public int MajorVersion { get; private set; }
        public DateTime CreateDate { get; set; }
        public FileExtension Extension { get; set; }

        public Document(string url)
        {
            Url = url;
            CreateAndSetLocalPath();
            SetFileName();
            Extension = SetFileExtension();
            SetVersion(2,0);
        }
        private FileExtension SetFileExtension() { return new FileExtension(); }
        private void SetFileName() { Console.WriteLine("Set the filename"); }
        private void CreateAndSetLocalPath() { Console.WriteLine("Created and set local path"); }
        public void SetVersion(int major, int minor) { Console.WriteLine("Version set to {0}.{1}", major, minor); }
        }

WordDocumentConverter class

public class WordDocumentConverter : Conversion
    {
        public WordDocumentConverter(IDocument doc)
        {
            Document = doc;
            //Construct object
        }
        protected override IDocument Document { get; set; }
        protected override bool SaveDocumentLocal { get; set; }
        protected override void BeforeConvert()
        {
            //Do stuff before converting
        }
        protected override Stream Convert()
        {
            //Specific Word document conversion logic here to convert the IDocument to something else
            Console.WriteLine("Converted from Word to PDF");
            return new MemoryStream();
        }
        protected override void SaveLocally(Stream doc)
        {
            //Specific save logic here...
            Console.WriteLine("Saved a copy of 'doc' locally");
        }
    }

Call code example

var doc = new Document(@"C:tempdoc1.docx");
var wdc = new WordDocumentConverter(doc);
wdc.ConvertDocument();

Let me know if I miss something or if I did not explain myself well. Thank you.

Is it valid to use "time in in words" for Schema.org Date / DateTime properties?

I have a bulletin board site and I wanted to incorporate a schema to his posts. One of the main attributes of publications is the date and time of their creation.

That being said, I came across the dateCreated property. The only problem I encounter in formatting requirements. The expected type is either Date or DateTime. For the purposes of the user experience, I wanted to display the date of publication a long time ago in words. So instead of:

October 21, 2015, 7:28 AM

I would do something like:

5 minutes ago

Can I still do something like this because the format of the date is not accurate?

functions – Apply valid variable bindings and avoid renaming for conflicting variables in nested scope constructs

Framing constructions, lexical perimeter and variable renaming

It pays to understand a little deeper about how perimeter structures work and what goes on behind the scenes when you run it. In addition to the documentation, this has been discussed in part here, but let us present a summary.

When the lexical construction of the scope Sc(vars, body) executes (where Sc can represent constructions such as With,Module, Function), the assessment is carried out roughly according to the following steps (or at least that corresponds to our current understanding of it):

  • First, the list of local variables vars is analyzed.
  • the body is analyzed and the presence of internal delimitation constructs is tested. This test is done textually, so that, to be detected, an internal scope construction ScInner must be present in body Under the form ScInner(innerVars, innerBody). If the inner scope construct is generated dynamically at run time (via ScInner @@ ... or otherwise), it is not detected by Sc during this step.
  • If inner scope constructs are found where some variables conflict with varsthen Sc rename them. It is important to point out that it is Sc this makes these renames in the internal scope constructs. Indeed, they are inert during this stage (since Sc at HoldAll attribute and so body is kept unrated), so Sc is the only function that can do this renaming.
  • The actual variable binding occurs. the body is sought for examples of varsand these instances are lexically linked to the variables.
  • Depending on the nature of the scope construction, other actions can be performed. Function do nothing, With replace symbols (variables) with their values ​​in body (depending on bindings), while Module creates var$xxx variables (depending on the bindings, both in the initialization and in the body), and then initializes the variables.
  • The code in body is actually allowed to evaluate.

How to deceive the constructions

From the description above, it is clear that, if we want to avoid renaming a construct of internal lexical scope ScInner(innerVars, innerBody) for whatever reason, one has to dynamically generate this code, so that it is not present in the interior Sc verbatim. Again, depending on the situation, we may or may not want to evaluate innerVars and innerBody.

More often than not, one wants to prevent such an assessment, so it is typical to use something like:

With({y = boundToZ}, With @@ Hold({y = z}, boundToZ)) 

or

With({y = boundToZ}, Hold({y = z}, boundToZ) /. Hold -> With)

or anything else that would prevent the innerVars or innerBody of the undesirable early evaluation.

Here is a more significant example. What follows is a new scope construct, which executes code code with a variable var bind to a current value retrieved from a Java iterator object:

ClearAll(javaIterate);
SetAttributes(javaIterate, HoldAll);
javaIterate(var_Symbol, code_)(iteratorInstance_?JavaObjectQ) :=
    While(iteratorInstance@hasNext(), 
        With @@ Hold({var = iteratorInstance@next()}, code)
    );

the iteratorInstance should be a Mathematica reference for the Java object implementation Iterator interface. The variable var is related to the current value of the iterator (extracted via iteratorInstance@next()), using With. This is non-trivial, since we build this With from pieces, and thus generate a lexical connection of this var to occurrences of var in codeat each iteration of the While loop. In this case, the external protection structure is actually SetDelayed. And we need the construction With @@ Hold(...) to prevent variable var rename, which is exactly what we do not want here.


However, there are cases, where we want all or part of innerVars or innerBody to be evaluated before the link phase for internal scope constructs. The case falls into this category. In this case, the easiest way may be to use Sc @@ {innerVars, innerBody}what is what acl did in his answer.

The case by hand

We now understand why this solution works:

Module({x, expr},
 expr = 2 x;
 Function @@ {x, expr}
) 
Function(x$5494, 2 x$5494)

Since there was no line Function(x,...) present textually, Module did not detect it. And since we want the variable and the body to be evaluated before Function performs the variable links, the second version (Function @@ {...}) has been used.

You will notice that Evaluate is not necessary because List is not the HoldAll attribute. This specific syntax is not the only approach. for example h(x, expr) /. h -> Function or ReplacePart({x, expr}, 0 -> Function) would also work because it does not explicitly exist Function(x, . . .) in the code.

It is instructive to realize that this version also works:

Module({x, expr}, 
   expr = 2 x;
   Function(Evaluate(x), Evaluate(expr))
)

while Function(...) is here, the presence of extra Evaluate around x in Function made impossible for Module detect the conflict. Of course, there are many other ways to achieve the same effect.

We now understand why do not job:

Module({x, expr},
 expr = 2 x;
 Function(x, z) /. z -> expr
)
Function(x, 2 x$151)

The point is, substitution z -> expr happens only at the stage where the body of the Module is evaluated, while the binding phase occurs earlier (as described above). During the binding phase, Module detects the name conflict well, and of course renames. Only then is x converted into a new created x$151, and only after all that the code inside Module executes – at this moment it is too late since the symbols inside Function and expr are different.

The case of Block

Block is a natural approach to guard against global values ​​but Szabolcs comments, it should be used with care. Block is not seen a scope construction for the purposes of the automatic name change described in the tutorial. You can also see some additional relevant discussions here. Because of this, you will not get the "protection" that you may be used to. Using the example of Szabolcs:

f(z_) := Block({x, expr}, expr = 2 x + z; Function(x, Evaluate(expr)))

f(x)
Function(x, 3 x)

Note that this function will triple its argument rather than doubling and adding Global`x what may or may not be what you expected. Such an injection is often very useful but at the same time, if you are used to automatic name-changing behavior (even if you are not aware of the mechanism), this may be surprising.

The OCFS2 cluster name is not valid when you try to join the group.

this error only occurs at startup, if I mount it manually, there is no problem at all.

systemctl status storage.mount

Jul 24 12:24:35 web1 systemd[1]: Mounting /storage...
Jul 24 12:24:35 web1 mount[1100]: mount.ocfs2: Cluster name is invalid while trying to join the group
Jul 24 12:24:35 web1 systemd[1]: storage.mount: Mount process exited, code=exited status=1
Jul 24 12:24:35 web1 systemd[1]: storage.mount: Failed with result 'exit-code'.
Jul 24 12:24:35 web1 systemd[1]: Failed to mount /storage.

javascript – Valid Braces Codewars Challenge revisited

I've recently reviewed the "Valid Braces" coding challenge on Codewars. I've already had work code for this challenge:

function validBraces(braces){
  let tracer = ()
  for(let i=0;i < braces.length; i++){
    if ( braces(i) === "(" || braces(i) === "{" || braces(i) === "("){
      tracer.push(braces(i))
    } else{
      if(tracer.length === 0) return false
      let lastValue = tracer(tracer.length-1)
      if( (braces(i) === ')' && lastValue === '(') || (braces(i) === '}' && lastValue === '{') || (braces(i) === ')' && lastValue === '('))
      {
        tracer.pop()
      } else {
        break;
      }
    }
  }
  return tracer.length === 0
}
console.log(validBraces("())({}}{())()("));

But I took the challenge blindly and that's what I found:

function validBraces(braces){
  let tracer = ();
  for (let i = 0; i < braces.length; i++) {
    if (braces(i) === "(" || braces(i) === "{" || braces(i) === "(") {
      tracer.push(braces(i));
    }
    else {
      if (tracer.length === 0) {
        return false;
      }
      if (braces(i) === ")" && tracer(tracer.length -1) === "(") {
        tracer.pop();
      }
      if (braces(i) === "}" && tracer(tracer.length -1) === "{") {
        tracer.pop();
      }
      if (braces(i) === ")" && tracer(tracer.length -1) === "(") {
        tracer.pop();
      }
    }
  }
  return tracer.length === 0;
}

^ He failed a test.

So my question is: what is really different from the first block of code compared to the second?

Just the fact that the three statements if are grouped into one?

Because if I do that:

function validBraces(braces){
  let tracer = ();
  for (let i = 0; i < braces.length; i++) {
    if (braces(i) === "(" || braces(i) === "{" || braces(i) === "(") {
      tracer.push(braces(i));
    }
    else {
      if (tracer.length === 0) {
        return false;
      }
      if (braces(i) === ")" && tracer(tracer.length -1) === "(") {
        tracer.pop();
      }
      if (braces(i) === "}" && tracer(tracer.length -1) === "{") {
        tracer.pop();
      }
      if (braces(i) === ")" && tracer(tracer.length -1) === "(") {
        tracer.pop();
      }
      else {
        break;
      }
    }
  }
  return tracer.length === 0;
}

So, 4 tests fail - why?

GREAT DUMPS ATM TRACKS 1 + 2 WITH PIN – Out Pin 101/201 UPDATE INSTOCK 100% VALID LEVEL | NewProxyLists

GREAT DUMPS ATM TRACKS 1 + 2 WITH PIN – Out Pin 101/201 UPDATE INSTOCK 100% VALID LEVEL

Dumps Track 1 & 2 with Pin (code 101/121/201/221 and mores)

** United States: 101
– Classic Visa, MasterCard Standard
– Gold Visa | Platinum | Business, MasterCard Gold | Platinum
– American Express (without SID)
– Discover

** Canada: 101,201
– Classic Visa, MasterCard Standard
– Gold Visa | Platinum | Business, MasterCard Gold | Platinum

** EU, United Kingdom: 101,201
– Classic | Standart
– Gold | Platinum
– Business | Signature | Purchase | Corporate | World

** ASIA / AUSTRALIA / Exotic: 101 201 121
– MasterCard | Visa Classic
– Gold Visa | Platinum | Company | Signature | Business

** Other countries: 101,201
– MasterCard | Visa Classic
– Gold Visa | Platinum | Company | Signature | Business

– Dumps, Tracks 1 & 2 US = 100 $ / 1, without pin 50 $
– Dumps, Tracks 1 & 2 UK = $ 110/1, No Pin $ 60
– Dumps, Tracks 1 & 2 EU = 120 $ / 1, No Pin 80 $
– Discharges, tracks 1 and 2 AU = 120 $ / 1, without pin 80 $
– Dumps, Tracks 1 & 2 CA = $ 120/1, without pin $ 80

Look for your bins for a quick and perfect removal !!! Do not be forgotten Rush For Your

Orders……..

I C Q: 2872222

Adwords. Still valid?

tsc,

As you've probably noticed, Google PPC has evolved considerably over the years: a new name, a new interface, new features, and so on.

The competition is fiercer, but Google still rewards the best CTRs with higher quality levels and lower average CPCs.

The quality of Google Ads (Adwords) traffic is always excellent, IHMO.