funky | funky.js HTML5 camera video effects

Try replacing getchar() with getwchar(); I think you're right that its a Windows-only problem.

I think the problem is that getchar(); is expecting input as a char type, which is 8 bits and only supports ASCII. getwchar(); supports the wchar_t type which allows for other text encodings. "😁" isn't ASCII, and from this page: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/learnwin32/working-with-strings , it seems like Windows encodes extended characters like this in UTF-16. I was having trouble finding a lookup table for utf-16 emoji, but I'm guessing that one of the bytes in the utf-16 "😁" is 0x39 which is why you're seeing that printed out.

This is an extension of a fix that was implemented in jOOQ 3.15.0 and 3.14.12: https://github.com/jOOQ/jOOQ/issues/11912

The problem is that kotlin generates a setInList() setter for mutable properties named isInList, instead of setIsInList(). In the above issue, this can clash with an equally named setter for an inList property:

In your play component use state for the currentlyPlaying and the audio.

The default ListCell.updateItem(...) method handles selection, among other things. So you need to be sure to call it.

From the documentation:

It is very important that subclasses of Cell override the updateItem method properly ... Note in this code sample two important points:

1. We call the super.updateItem(T, boolean) method. If this is not done, the item and empty properties are not correctly set, and you are likely to end up with graphical issues.
2. ...

So you need:

Tracked it down to this that had been added in index.html!...

you have a typo in these code block:

Why don't you try overriding the onStart, if Im not mistaken it is called before onResume and by then the app will not be shown to the user just yet.

In the above code sample, you defining funky in two different cpp files but have declared in your class. So following should be the correct format:

The difference between your 1 example and your 2, 3, and 4 examples is that you are not specifying the generic type parameters when you call on() in 1, whereas you are in the others. Even 2 and 3, where you do not manually specify the type parameters, you are doing so implicitly with the type parameter defaults.

But for example 1, you do not specify the type parameters at all, and instead, the compiler infers them from the values you pass in for the selector and settings arguments. It does not use the type parameter defaults here, unless inference completely fails and it falls back to them.

It looks like the behavior you're looking for is for the compiler not to use type inference at all, and instead use the defaults. But such type inference is a feature that is desirable most of the time. There's no "turn off inference here" switch you can turn.

There is an open suggestion at microsoft/TypeScript#14829 to be able to ask the compiler not to infer a type parameter from a particular site where it appears. Something like NoInfer would mean "this is T, but don't use a value of type NoInfer to infer T". If that feature were implemented, you could change