leak | Show info about package releases on PyPI | Build Tool library

Ideally, your cleanup should look like this:

Try setting up the toggle-dark-mode event handler once when you start your Electron app.

Your code doesn't need to be in the ready event even.

1. It is the main method, so there is no need to cleanup. When main returns, the program exits. If this wasn't the main, then you would be correct.

2. There is no best practice that fits all use cases. The code you show here is a very common pattern. The function creates a goroutine, and returns a channel so that others can communicate with that goroutine. There is no rule that governs how channels must be created. There is no way to terminate that goroutine though. One use case this pattern fits well is reading a large resultset from a database. The channel allows streaming data as it is read from the database. In that case usually there are other means of terminating the goroutine though, like passing a context.

3. Again, there are no hard rules on how channels should be created/closed. A channel can be left open, and it will be garbage collected when it is no longer used. If the use case demands so, the channel can be left open indefinitely, and the scenario you worry about will never happen.

As mentioned by @oguz_ismail in the comments, bug-bash@gnu.org is the appropriate place to report the bug.

However, a certain format for the email is required/requested, when you need to report a bug.

All bug reports should include:

• The version number of Bash.
• The hardware and operating system.
• The compiler used to compile Bash.
• A description of the bug behaviour.
• A short script or ‘recipe’ which exercises the bug and may be used to reproduce it.

You can find ALL the details at: https://www.gnu.org/software/bash/manual/html_node/Reporting-Bugs.html

Finally, there is a helper script built into bash itself. Call bashbug from the command line, and it will populate most of the requirements, leaving you to fill out the description and the steps required to reproduce the bug.

This is a globally distributed service and you are hitting a different DC where the user has not replicated to. It can take some seconds till the user appears across all DCs in the region.

This is the expected behaviour and you must architect a solution with this in mind. You can use retry logic but ideally you do not perform a GET subsequent to a POST/PATCH operation.

Ideally you orchestrate sign up through AAD B2C policies which do not have this issue.

You should check not-null-state each access to your variable. But... there is an additional problem, you have to consider the activity state before doing something with it (I mean the lifecycle state).

C++ doesn't protect you against elementary mistakes. In this case you call delete on something you didn't new, which generally results in a crash. The moral of the story is 'don't do that'.

As for a memory leak, yes, you leak the memory allocated with new (because you lose track of it when you reassign var).

Nothing wrong with validation loss being lower than training loss. It simply depends on the probability distribution of the validation set. If you have a lot of dropout in your model this can easily be the case because training loss is calculated with dropout present. In calculating the validation loss dropout is disabled. Issue is is your training accuracy at an acceptable level. If it is not then reduce regularization in the model.

In case of problems with valgrind, it is always recommended to try with a recent version, either the last release or the git version.

Note that it is quite easy to recompile valgrind from sources, at it has very few dependencies.

In case of specific problems with stack traces, it is always useful to compare the stack traces produced by valgrind and gdb by using valgrind + gdb + vgdb.

Put a breakpoint in gdb at relevant places, and you can then compare the gdb stacktrace produced by the gdb backtrace command and the valgrind stacktrace produced by the monitoring command: