formalize | Teach your forms some manners

I'm writing unit-tests to test file-IO functions. There's no formalized test-framework in my target language, so my idea is to run a little test program that somehow manipulates files in a test-directory, and after that checks the results in a little shell script.

To evaluate the output, I want to check a given directory whether all expected files are there and no other files have been created during the test.

My first attempt goes like this:

...

This Meteor code has let Vehicles= new Mongo.Collection('vehicles'); and a html

, I like use the .find({}).count() the below code works fine but I read to avoid the use of eval(). Reading up on alternatives could not satisfy me to formalize a solution. Please help with a solution or show how to write this in a non eval() way. Thanks

Update: It needs to run on the server "nodeJs" and not in the browser

...

I am trying to create my first Isabelle/HOL theory for the algorithm, that computer max integer from the two integers. My intention is to formalize algorithms, this is the initial attempt. That is why I am trying to make my Isabelle code as similar to usual s. c. "industrial programming langauges" or the algol-style code as possible. So - no much use of the default primrec and recursive definitions (with matching and branching) that Isabelle prefers. I came up with the theory:

...

I have this data structure, a dict composed by lists of lists (a sort of tree structure), in which the letters are phrases:

...

EDIT: I implemented offered solutions so far, and the code looks way cleaner now. This was the key to finally finding my error. It was a logical condition that I didn't check within the while loop. It could happen that the iterator would exceed the number of elements in the vector and thus pass a "NA" to the while condition! Thx

I also changed the solution to use vector assignments to store the results and then recombine after the for loop, as vector indexing seems to be way faster than data.table indexing and value assignment within the loop.

Pls let me apologize first for any errors and lack of information for troubleshooting my problem as this is my first post so far. I have already read that this can happen accidentally whenever ther is an error in a computation and the value of a condition results in an error, such as if (TRUE & sqrt(-1))

It's been days and I am still receiving this error. It really gives me a headache, as the inherent logic behind such code is actually pretty straigth forward and I still can't properly formalize it. It goes like following: Compare for each unique bond ID contained in a vector of size N (loop through with i), the static value of its corresponding maturity to 7 periods' end date for distinct set of rules (loop through with k) to determine which periods with unique rules the respective issue falls into, and then determine by looping through all the periods' size thresholds (loop through by l) to find if a particular issue has violted these minimium size requirements. If a violation is determined, I can assign the date of the violation. If (l == k), I can reckon that for all periods that the issue's maturity falls into, have also successfully looped through the corresponding size requirements checks and as such hasn't violated any rules. I then assign the result of the conditional checks as corresponding binary values in a new data.table column as well as the violation date. So far, I really cant determine what is casusing this error.

My data looks like following. I have a pretty large data.table containing bond issue identifiers and various other column variables that describe those issues. It was imported as initially with the read_dta() function and then transformed to a data.table with setDT().

I extract 3 columns out of this data.table, using

...

A benefit of concepts in C++20 is that this feature allows, and encourages, programmers to specify (using the C++ language itself) information about their interfaces that formerly had to be in human-only documentation, in a natural language like English.

For example, I have a generic algorithm, let's call it template class X> void foo(X). My foo() solves a certain problem in the numerical domain. My plain-English documentation for how to use foo() says something like this: "foo() accepts an argument of class X, which the user of foo must implement. The class X has an integer template parameter N describing how many rows it has. Class X provides operator [] to access the elements of a row. X also provides a member function reduce(), unless N=1, in which case reduction does not make sense because there is only one row."

How would I conceptify this? My first approach is just:

...

I am comparing lavaan objects using semTools::compareFit. It is throwing a very strange error message.

I tried also the following reproducible example:

...

Given the following theories, which formalize meaningless stuff for the purpose of a small MWE,

...

I'd like to formalize formal languages and their semantics in MMT and define a general notion of semantics equivalence of two semantics wrt. one syntax. Precisely, encoding the latter turns out to be an identification/glueing that I have no idea on how to do in MMT. Let me elaborate on my concrete formalization setup next.

Below is a simplified formalization showing my approach. Based on a theory Meta aggregating both the logical framework LF and some logic, I start in Syntax defining a general notion of expressions and typings. Then, in Semantics I define on top a semantics, here for simplicity, only a deductive semantics, i.e. a derivability relation.

...