scs | Splitting Conic Solver | Performance Testing library

Does this would do?

Both compilers are correct. Flowing off the end of a coroutine when the promise type doesn't have return_void is undefined behaviour:

[stmt.return.coroutine]/3:

If p.return_­void() is a valid expression, flowing off the end of a coroutine is equivalent to a co_­return with no operand; otherwise flowing off the end of a coroutine results in undefined behavior.

You can define a noop return_void in the promise type to get the behaviour you seem to be going for:

RecordFilterStrategy is not supported by Spring Cloud Stream.

You can add ListenerContainerCustomizer bean example here and add a RecordInterceptor to the listener container. If the interceptor returns null, the listener is not called and the offset will be committed, as if the listener was called and exited normally.

Yes; it will happen after the call to the error handler; from the listener container's perspective, the entire spring-cloud-stream infrastructure is the record "listener".

I think you should specify the path to your Java SDK in Android Studio, you can set it by doing the following:

Generally speaking, it is set in the "Project Structure" dialog.

Go to File > Project Structure > SDK Location. The third field is "JDK Location" where you can set it. This will set it for the current project.

How to set Java SDK path in AndroidStudio?

Here's a basic example with all the code on the Excel side:

Use printf and %u and so:

Unfortunately, the message is generated by GLPK 4.65, regardless of the GLP_MSG_* option used.

However, it appears that version 5.0 has fixed this, see this glpk-help mailing-list message from the library maintainer:

To fix the bug please replace lines 923-930 in glpk/src/draft/glpios03.c

The problem of random values observed on inputs are generally caused by floating inputs. An input is considered in floating state if it's not driven by an output or a some kind of source. In this case, a floating input behaves like an antenna, it can get any voltage level randomly and the logic connected to it switches between 1 & 0 randomly.

It seems most of the time, electronics and uC beginners learn about them for the first time when they experiment with buttons. My experience was similar. The input was triggering when I get my finger close to the button, but before I actually press or even touch it. Later, I observed that they can also be triggered by the changes of adjacent output pins of the uC.

Fortunately, the solution is simple. Just add a pull-up or pull-down resistor, so that the output is driven by VDD or GND even when the button is not pressed. Pull-ups seem to be more popular (I'm not sure why), so you generally connect the button in such a way that it pulls the input pin to the ground when the button is pressed and provide a pull-up resistor between the pin and VDD. In this case, your program logic reads the input as 0 when the button is pressed.

BTW, you could connect the pin directly to the VDD to prevent it from floating. But in this case, a button press would short circuit VDD to GND, collapse the VDD and reset the uC. This can also damage the power regulator (actually most of them have thermal shutdown to protect themselves), the button itself or the wires (or traces on the PCB). This is why you need a resistor.

Most uCs also provide internal weak pull-ups which can be activated by software. Here, weak means that these resistors have high values (like 100k ohms) and they don't pull the pin strongly. In cases where you need stronger ones (like pulling up communication lines) you may need to use external ones.

Some more recent uCs may provide internal weak pull-down resistors too. STM32 uCs have this capability. Your PIC12F1822 has only pull-up resistors, but fortunately they can be controlled individually. In some older PIC models, you have single switch to activate pull-ups on all pins of PORTB.

To activate internal weak pull-up on RA4: