CodeX | online compiler for various languages | Authentication library

You don't need plugins to set up key bindings. Here is one way to do it:

1. Create your function:

Go to Views > Home > Index.cshtml then Remove code.

People like to repeat that one sound bite, but Guido had more to say on the subject, like:

Van Rossum didn't rule out the possibility of Python 4.0 entirely, though suggested this would likely only happen in the event of major changes to compatibility with C. "I could imagine that at some point we are forced to abandon certain binary or API compatibility for C extensions… If there was a significant incompatibility with C extensions without changing the language itself and if we were to be able to get rid of the GIL [global interpreter lock]; if one or both of those events were to happen, we probably would be forced to call it 4.0 because of the compatibility issues at the C extension level," he said.

(source: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/programming-languages-why-python-4-0-will-probably-never-arrive-according-to-its-creator/ - which contains a link to a video with more, if you have the time)

So the upshot of it seems to be that there will never be a Python 4, unless the advantages of making backwards compatibility breaking changes are so great, they simply dwarf the massive downsides that have become so apparent from the 2-to-3 change.

Programmers and programming language designers are pragmatic people, generally speaking. If the benefit outweighs the cost, it will happen eventually. Nobody has anything to gain from religious zeal about design choices.

I am unable to run the repro you provided because it appears to require private API keys.

However, inspecting the code, here's what appears to be happening:

1. The component renders for the first time with reporting state as false. This causes the component to render, and a new instance of Uppy to be created by the effect within that component and stored in this instance of the 's state.
2. The user uploads a file, and hits the "continue" button, which sets reporting state to true. This causes the component to re-render, and show the component instead. The original component is unmounted, and the things that were present in its state, notably, the instance of Uppy that had the user's uploaded file, are lost.
3. The user hits the "Back To Photos" button, which sets reporting state back to false. A this causes a new instance of to render, and the effect that creates an instance of Uppy re-runs. The instance that is created is new as well, and thus won't show what it contained the last time it was rendered.

One way to solve this would be to lift up state that needs to remain the same as the is mounted and unmounted into the parent component. So the component would be responsible for creating the Uppy instance, and pass that as a prop to the .

See also this part of the Uppy docs:

Functional components are re-run on every render. This could lead to accidentally recreate a fresh Uppy instance every time, causing state to be reset and resources to be wasted.

The @uppy/react package provides a hook useUppy() that can manage an Uppy instance’s lifetime for you. It will be created when your component is first rendered, and destroyed when your component unmounts.

You could also re-factor your app in other ways if it feels like too much is happening in a single component. But the guiding principle would be: "don't create the uppy instance more than once in a single user flow".

You are checking if list is isupper . You'll need to do

In the future try to limit yourself to one question per question but the answers to your questions are pretty succinct, so...

Let's turn that conditional type declaration into some psuedo code that more clearly indicates what's going on:

type InstanceType(T) = if T is a class then the type of the thing constructed by newing that class else type never

And lets gradually move back towards the actual code (these are all representations of the same thing):

I am not sure why we need ExtractInstanceType & why we don't want to just use IStaff?

Because the whole point of the userMap and the associated static method is to map names to specific, concrete classes, not the interface they implement. If any of those classes implement class-specific stuff on top of the general IStaff interface (and they almost certainly will) your code would be littered with instanceof or other checks every time you called a method not in IStaff if you didn't nip it in the bud by narrowing the type with that static method to satisfy the compiler.

I thought it was just one of the keys in the dictionary that userMap can hold, which would be a string?

As I suggested in the comments on my answer to your other question I think the problem is that you are still conflating types and values. TBF it doesn't help that there's some overlap.

Consider the string 'a'. In Typescript, there is the value 'a' but there is also the literal type 'a', which is a subset of type string:

you have to move classroom folder to root of project beside manage.py or use codex.classroom instead of classroom

You can pass your own separator in read.csv.sql function from sqldf. Here is an answer with a small example.