Scribble | Detecting early sings of Alzheimers through computer vision | Computer Vision library

You are doing go get on github.com/nanobox-io/golang-scribble but you're importing github.com/nanobox.io/golang-scribble, the difference being nanobox-io vs nanobox.io. Try changing your import statement to github.com/nanobox-io/golang-scribble.

In order to move the cursor to a specified position, it's necessary to use the underlying QTextDocument using document().
Through findBlockByLineNumber you can construct a QTextCursor and use setTextCursor() to "apply" that cursor (including the actual caret position) to the plain text.

Your first diagram assumes that the duration of logging is always shorter than processing:

• If this assumption is correct, the upper flow reaches the flow-final node, and the remaining flows continue until the first reaches the activity-final node. Here, the processing continues and the activity ends when the processing ends. This is exactly what you want.
• But if once, the execution would deviate from this assumption and logging would get delayed for any reason, then the end of the processing would reach the activity-final node, resulting in the immediate interruption of all other ongoing activities. So logging would not complete. Maybe it’s not a problem for you, but in most cases audit expects logs to be complete.

You may be interested in a safer way that would be to add a join node:

The advantage is that the activity does not depend on any assumptions. It will always work:

• whenever the logging is faster, the token on that flow will wait at the join node, and as soon as process is finished the activity (safely) the join can happen and the outgoing token reaches the end. This is exactly what you currently expect.
• if the logging is exceptionally slower, no problem: the processing will be over, but the activity will wait for the logging to be completed.

This robust notation makes logging like Schroedinger's cat in its box: we don't have to know what activity is longer or shorter. At the end of the activity, both actions are completed.

Activity diagrams are not really meant to express timing and duration. It's about the flow of control and the synchronization.

However, if time is important to you, you could:

• visually make one activity shorter than the other. This is super-ambiguous and absolute meaningless from a formal UML point of view. But it's intuitive when readers see the parallel flow (a kind of sublminal communication ;-) ) .
• add a comment note to express your assumption in plain English. This has the advantage of being very clear an unambiguous.
• using UML duration constraints. This is often used in timing diagram, sometimes in sequence diagrams, but in general not in activity diagrams (personally I have never seen it, but UML specs doesn't exclude it either).

Time is something very general in the UML specs, and defined independently of the diagram. For example:

8.4.4.2: A Duration is a value of relative time given in an implementation specific textual format. Often a Duration is a non- negative integer expression representing the number of “time ticks” which may elapse during this duration.

8.5.1: An Interval is a range between two values, primarily for use in Constraints that assert that some other Element has a value in the given range. Intervals can be defined for any type of value, but they are especially useful for time and duration values as part of corresponding TimeConstraints and DurationConstraints.

In your case you have a duration observation for the processing (e.g. d), and a duration constraint for the logging (e.g. 0..d).

8.5.4.2: An IntervalConstraint is shown as an annotation of its constrainedElement. The general notation for Constraints may be used for an IntervalConstraint, with the specification Interval denoted textually (...).

Unfortunately little more is said. The only graphical examples are for messages in sequence diagrams (Fig 8.5 and 17.5) and for timing diagrams (Fig 17.28 to 17.30). Nevertheless, the notation could be extrapolated for activity diagrams, but it would be so unusal that I'd rather recommend the comment note.

The issue is that you are using euclidean distance for comparing strings. Consider using Levenshtein distance, or something similar, which is designed for strings. NLTK has a function called edit distance that can do this or you can implement it on your own.

If you run the program in a prompt/terminal, you'll clearly see the following traceback:

The documentation states:

To enable link handling verification for your app, set android:autoVerify="true" in any one of the web URL intent filters in your app manifest that include the android.intent.action.VIEW intent action and android.intent.category.BROWSABLE intent category [...]

When android:autoVerify="true" is present on any one of your intent filters, installing your app on devices with Android 6.0 and higher causes the system to attempt to verify all hosts associated with the URLs in any of your app's intent filters. Verification involves the following:

The system inspects all intent filters that include:

• Action: android.intent.action.VIEW
• Categories: android.intent.category.BROWSABLE and android.intent.category.DEFAULT
• Data scheme: http or https For each unique host name found in the above intent filters, Android queries the corresponding websites for the Digital Asset Links file at https:///.well-known/assetlinks.json.

Only if the system finds a matching Digital Asset Links file for all hosts in the manifest does it then establish your app as the default handler for the specified URL patterns.

So in order for you to skip the disambiguation dialog, you need to verify that you configured your app correctly and that the assetlinks.json is available at the correct location. From experience common pitfalls are:

• Forgetting the autoVerify
• Having multiple links declared in one statement and not having the correct association file present on EVERY domain
• Forgetting having granted development apps special permissions before
• Having more than one app installed which tries to register itself as the resolver of the link

You can use this handy tool to check if your configuration file is correct:

https://developers.google.com/digital-asset-links/tools/generator

you can try : path/to/python3 -m path/to/script.py

or just specify the full path : 'C://Users/quina//...//word.txt'

Maybe try to use the normale python3 IDLE or throught the terminal just to understand you error.

There is no word.txt in 'Visual Studio Projects' folder

You just need only one GeometryReader, external one.

Here is corrected code. Tested with Xcode 12.1 / iOS 14.1

I think this page shows some really nice solutions for the problem of yours. For example, it shows how to implement a custom class which actually gives you a "drawing board":