lvr | Augmented Reality for everyone - Out of the world | Augmented Reality library

When data is sent in JObject format, why convert it to JObject again?

In this case, there is no need to re-edit and you only extract the data from the standard format. Delete this line: JObject myJO = JObject.Parse (data.ToString ());

For more information, you can refer to the following links

• JObject Class

• Using JObject.Properties

This is my exact specialty! In general, if you want a constraint to depend on the choice for particular variables (e.x. which QB variable is picked), you'll need to set up a new constraint for each possible choice, in a somewhat clever way to ensure that that constraint only does anything when that variable was chosen.

1. Stack at least n players with your QB: You're going to have a new constraint for each QB in your player pool. The constraint will look like this:

You can split the data into two separate dataframes and use df.merge to match the names.

Your cte names are the same, try using in your models unique cte (common table expression) names. You can see you are referencing twice a cte called "renamed". Try changing this and write back what is Snowflake spitting out.

I might be misunderstanding your problem but local::lib allows you to "manually" tune your module path. You should be able to use it to control what paths are used for your test environment.

What I would do:

In this scenario, I would set up some dummy test data in the back end, to be able to test this properly, JSON format, or a standard data type (map or object) to compliment my scenario:

Here MyAnnotation is a subclass of NSObject, MKAnnotation

If you're getting a stack overflow, that means your function call stack is getting too deep. That can happen when building a binary search tree if the tree ends up being unbalanced.

Best case, your tree height will be O(log n), worst case it will be O(n). If you place items into the tree in sorted order, your binary tree will degenerate into a linked list and you'll hit the worst case.

For this particular example, you're generating random numbers from 0 to 99. You might get more randomize results if you increase the range of the numbers. So instead of using rand()%100, use something like rand()%10000. That might help keep the height of the tree down.

On an unrelated note, you have a memory leak. First, the initial node you allocate for the root of the tree gets overwritten, so you don't need it. Second, you never bother to free the tree structure.

You can take care of these as follows:

A dictionary would be appropriate for this.