cook | macOS command line tool to automate common iOS development

I want to create two new columns in job_transitions_sample.csv and add the wage data from wage_data_sample.csv for both Title 1 and Title 2:

job_transitions_sample.csv:

I have a file separated by semicolons in which one of the variables of type character contains semicolon inside it. The readr::read_csv2 function splits the contents of those variables that have semicolons into more columns, messing up the formatting of the file.

For example, when using read_csv2 to open the file below, Bill's age column will show jogging, not 41.

File:

I'm at the beginning of starting a project for learning backend development with a bit of frontend development. For that, I wanted to create a project around cooking recipes. The plan was to create an admin REST API that would be later used by a custom CMS to create, edit, delete,... recipes and a public api for a mobile app where your users can discover cooking recipes. Simplicity wise, I thought about choosing Mongodb as the database. While creating a Mongodb schema, I came up with this idea:

• Three main collections

I'm confused by the way Java streams work, particularly as regard to short-circuiting. For an example of what confuses me, I cooked up the following example:

I'm new to working with XML and XSD files. What I'm trying to do is validate an xml file using a schema. This is the start of my XML file:

A simple unit test (without junit) gives weird exception

Is it possible to increase de accracy / precision of the Geocoder JSON response?

I could accomplish it using the Map, however, with the Geocoder It wasn't possible.

Problem Description

Using Mapbox Geocoder for JS:

I am trying to get to grips with the specifics of the (C++20) standards requirements for container classes with a view to writing some container classes that are compatible with the standard library. To begin looking into this matter I have looked up the references for named requirements, specifically around container requirements, and have only found one general container requirement called Container given by the standard. Reading this requirement has given my two queries that I am unsure about and would like some clarification on:

1. The requirement for the expression a == b for two container type C has as precondition on the element type T that it is equality comparable. However, noted later on the same page under the header 'other requirements' is the explicitly requirement that T be always equality comparable. Thus, on my reading the precondition for the aforementioned requirement is redundant and need not be given. Am I correct in this thinking, or is there something else at play here that I should take into account?

2. I was surprised to see explicit requirements on T at all: notably the equality comparable requirement above and the named requirement destructible. Does this mean it is undefined behaviour to ever construct standard containers of types failing these requirements, or only to perform certain standard library function calls on them?

Apologies if these two questions sound asinine, I am currently trying to transition my C++ knowledge from a place of having a basic understanding of how to use features to a robust understanding so that I may write good generic code. Whilst I am trying to use (a draft of) the standard to look up behaviour where possible, its verbiage is oft too verbose for me to completely understand what is actually being said.

In an attempt to seek the answer I cooked up a a quick test .cpp file to try an compile, given below. All uncommented code compiles with MSVC compiler set to C++20. All commented code will not compile, and visa versa all uncommented code will. It seems that what one naively thinks should work does In particular:

• We cannot construct any object without a destructor, though the objects type is valid and can be used for other things (for example as a template parameter!)
• We cannot create an object of vector, where T has no destructor, even if we don't attempt to create any objects T. Presumably because creating the destructor for vector tries to access a destructor for T.
• We can create an object of type vector, T where T has no operator ==, so long as we do not try to use operator ==, which would require T to have operator ==.

However, just because my compiler lets me make an object of vector where T is not equality-comparable does not mean I have achieved standards compliant behaviour/ all of our behaviour is not undefined - which is what I want I concerned about, especially as at least some of the usual requirements on the container object have been violated.

Code:

I have a pandas dataframe column that contains list of strings (lengths are different) like below: df['category']: