HATE | The Undertale Corruptor

Why not simply use const { pathname } = useLocation();? It will indeed renders if the state changes but it shouldn't be a big deal in most scenarii.

If you REALLY want to avoid such behaviour, you could create a context of your own to hold the pathname:

You can use a new gcloud feature and impersonate your local credential like that:

Finally, I put this to the side for some time when I got more R savvy. Instead of trying to overcomplicate things, I decided to make a really simple SEM path plot, then apply what was said in the comments here earlier to solve the issue.

So the major issue I kept having was getting the title to map on. For some reason I couldn't understand what was causing the issue...until I figured out the order of operations for printing out the plot. So here is basically what I did. First I used a well-oiled data frame and wrote a model based off the old lavaan manual:

The evaluation order of A = B was not specified before c++17, after c++17 B is guaranteed to be evaluated before A, see https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/eval_order rule 20.

The behaviour of valMap[val] = valMap.size(); is therefore unspecified in c++14, you should use:

Yes, there's no reason why constexpr std::initializer_list would be unusable in compile-time initialization.

From your code snippet, it's unclear whether you've used an in-class initialization for StaticArray members, so one of the issues you could've run into is that a constexpr constructor can't use a trivial constructor for members which would initialize them to unspecified run-time values.

So the fix for your example is to default-initialize StaticArray members and specify constexpr for the constructor, checkDims, addList and data. To initialize a runtime StaticArray with constexpr std::initializer_list validated at compile-time, you can make the initializer expression manifestly constant-evaluated using an immediate function.

As you probably realize, it is impossible to initialize a run-time variable at compile-time so that's the best one can do.

If what you wanted is to validate at compile-time the dimensions of an std::initializer_list that depends on runtime variables, it can't be done -- the std::initializer_list is not constexpr, so its size isn't either. Instead, you can define a wrapper type around Scalar, mark its default constructor as deleted, and accept an aggregate type of these wrappers in the StaticArray constructor, for example a nested std::array of the desired dimensions, or, to avoid double braces, a C-style multidimensional array. Then, if the dimensions don't match, compilation will fail for either of the two reasons: too many initializers or the use of the deleted default constructor.

The code below compiles on godbolt with every GCC, Clang, MSVC version that supports C++20.

This is really a math/algorithm question (which are always fun!). So a good approach is to see if you can figure out the pattern. E.g., given 3 arrays, [1,2,3,4], [x,y,z], and [11,12], you expect

Not sure if this exactly what you are looking for, but here is my attempt with rowwise and unnest

Hazy recollection but I'll give it a go.

The installation to the GAC means that when the package runs, the execution engine will be able to find the required assemblies and do the code instructions.

Design-time needs the assemblies elsewhere because...reasons. With 2005/2008, you had to manually add items to the "SSIS Toolbox." You are attempting to add items to the "Toolbox" which is a confusingly similar name but it's not SSIS. SSIS Toolbox is populated only when a package is opened and the project type is SSIS.

Visual Studio now automagically picks up components but either way, the assemblies need to be sitting in the targeted version Microsoft SQL Server XXX DTS assembly-domain folder.

Assume I build a dataflow component with bindings for SQL Server 2017. I would therefore install to

Constructors can have side-effects beyond constructing the new object. The semantics of the two versions could therefore differ.

Even if that is not the case, the compiler might not be able to determine that during compilation. For example if the copy constructor of the foo type is not defined in the same translation unit and no link-time optimization is used, the compiler wouldn't be able to optimize away the copy, since it might have side-effects that are unknown at compilation time of the current translation unit.

Similarly the loop body might call functions for which the compiler cannot prove that they don't modify foo, in which case the copy can also not be optimized away.

(This is by the way harder for the compiler to prove than it is for clang-tidy to give you the warning, since even a function taking a const reference of foo is technically still allowed to modify it. And even if the foo object itself is const-qualified (e.g. const auto), functions may depend on the address of the foo object being different than that of the container's foo object through other program paths.)

Even if everything is visible in the translation unit and the observable behavior doesn't depend on the copy, the operations might be too complex for the compiler to optimize the copy away.

Example: