order | Order Module For Vanilo | Ecommerce library

I was facing the same issue while running docker containers with flask.

I downgraded Flask to 1.1.4 and markupsafe to 2.0.1 which solved my issue.

Check this for reference.

This problem's caused by a bug in Springfox. It's making an assumption about how Spring MVC is set up that doesn't always hold true. Specifically, it's assuming that MVC's path matching will use the Ant-based path matcher and not the PathPattern-based matcher. PathPattern-based matching has been an option for some time now and is the default as of Spring Boot 2.6.

As described in Spring Boot 2.6's release notes, you can restore the configuration that Springfox assumes will be used by setting spring.mvc.pathmatch.matching-strategy to ant-path-matcher in your application.properties file. Note that this will only work if you are not using Spring Boot's Actuator. The Actuator always uses PathPattern-based parsing, irrespective of the configured matching-strategy. A change to Springfox will be required if you want to use it with the Actuator in Spring Boot 2.6 and later.

From the node-fetch package readme:

node-fetch is an ESM-only module - you are not able to import it with require. We recommend you stay on v2 which is built with CommonJS unless you use ESM yourself. We will continue to publish critical bug fixes for it.

If you want to require it, then downgrade to v2.

The other option you have is to use async import('node-fetch').then(...)

I know this does not solve your problem directly, but consider moving to springdoc which most recent release supports Spring Boot 2.6.0. Springfox is so buggy at this point that is a pain to use. I've moved to springdoc 2 years ago because of its Spring WebFlux support and I am very happy about it. Additionally, it also supports Kotlin Coroutines, which I am not sure Springfox does.

If you decide to migrate, springdoc even has a migration guide.

Update the Rust to satisfy the new edition 2021.

rustup default nightly && rustup update

Thanks to @ken. Yes, you can use the stable channel too!

But I love nightly personally.

On a byte-level there is no difference. To better understand how Big-endian differs from Little-endian, consider this:

As can be seen, we have three bytes in the example, the bits of each having a different color. Notice how the bits in each byte look exactly the same in both BE and LE.

That is language-agnostic BTW.

As for the Rust functions operating on u8, Trent explained it very well. My answer focuses more on the part how BE/LE work in general.

The thread sanitizer currently doesn't support std::atomic_thread_fence. (GCC and Clang use the same thread sanitizer, so it applies to both.)

GCC 12 (currently trunk) warns about it:

It's as you said: It can't be done at the moment as Github Actions doesn't support expressions with uses attributes.

There is no workaround (yet?) because the workflow interpreter (that also checks the workflow syntax when you push the workflow to the repository) can't get the value from the expression at that moment.

It could maybe work if the workflow was recognized by the interpreter, but it doesn't event appear on the Actions tab as it's considered invalid.

For the moment, you can only use tag, branch ref or commit hash after the @ symbol, the same way you use any action.

Note that someone else had the same issue here

Here's my current understanding, which could be incomplete or incorrect. A verification would be appreciated.

C++20 renamed strongly happens before to simply happens before, and introduced a new, more relaxed definition for strongly happens before, which imposes less ordering.

Simply happens before is used to reason about the presence of data races in your code. (Actually that would be the plain 'happens before', but the two are equivalent in absence of consume operations, the use of which is discouraged by the standard, since most (all?) major compilers treat them as acquires.)

The weaker strongly happens before is used to reason about the global order of seq-cst operations.

This change was introduced in proposal P0668R5: Revising the C++ memory model, which is based on the paper Repairing Sequential Consistency in C/C++11 by Lahav et al (which I didn't fully read).

The proposal explains why the change was made. Long story short, the way most compilers implement atomics on Power and ARM architectures turned out to be non-conformant in rare edge cases, and fixing the compilers had a performance cost, so they fixed the standard instead.

The change only affects you if you mix seq-cst operations with acquire-release operations on the same atomic variable (i.e. if an acquire operation reads a value from a seq-cst store, or a seq-cst operation reads a value from a release store).

If you don't mix operations in this manner, then you're not affected (i.e. can treat simply happens before and strongly happens before as equivalent).

The gist of the change is that the synchronization between a seq-cst operation and the corresponding acquire/release operation no longer affects the position of this specific seq-cst operation in the global seq-cst order, but the synchronization itself is still there.

This makes the seq-cst order for such seq-cst operations very moot, see below.

The proposal presents following example, and I'll try to explain my understanding of it: