frequent | crawling websites and building frequency lists

Going with the WCU calculation guide here it looks like BatchWriteItem and PutItem both follows the same rounding off calculation for the size and will have same WCU consumed.

For PutItem, UpdateItem, and DeleteItem operations, DynamoDB rounds the item size up to the next 1 KB. For example, if you put or delete an item of 1.6 KB, DynamoDB rounds the item size up to 2 KB.

BatchWriteItem—Writes up to 25 items to one or more tables. DynamoDB processes each item in the batch as an individual PutItem or DeleteItem request (updates are not supported). So DynamoDB first rounds up the size of each item to the next 1 KB boundary, and then calculates the total size. The result is not necessarily the same as the total size of all the items. For example, if BatchWriteItem writes a 500-byte item and a 3.5 KB item, DynamoDB calculates the size as 5 KB (1 KB + 4 KB), not 4 KB (500 bytes + 3.5 KB).

In a histogram, a "rectangle"'s height represents how many values are in the given range which is in turn described by the width of the rectangle. You can get the width of each rectangle by (max - min) / number_of_rectangles.

For example, in the matplotlib's output, there are 10 rectangles (bins). Since your data has a minimum around 3 and maximum around 50, each width is around 4.7 units wide. Now, to get the 3rd rectangles range, for example, we start from minimum and add this width until we get there, i.e., 3 + 4.7*2 = 12.4. It then ends at 12.4 + 4.7 = 17.1. So, the counts corresponding to 3rd bin is the number of values in tips_df.total_bill that fall in this range. Let's find it manually:

is it worth it to make a class polymorphic just because of one only among many other of its method is needed to behave differently depending on the data type?

Runtime polymorphism starts to provide undeniable net value when the class hierarchy is deep, or may grow arbitrarily in future. So, if this code is just used in the private implementation of a small library you're writing, start with what's more efficient if you have real reason to care about efficiency (type_ and if), then it's not much work to change it later anyway. If lots of client code may start to depend your choices here though, making it difficult to change later, and there's some prospect of further versions of someMethod() being needed, it's probably better to start with the virtual dispatch approach.

Is there any better approach?

Again - what's "better" takes shape at scale and depends on how the code is depended upon, updated etc.. Other possible approaches include using a std::variant, or even a std::any object, function pointers....

Raster or bitmap fonts are represented in a number of different ways and there are bitmap font file standards that have been developed for both Linux and Windows. However raw data representation of bitmap fonts in programming language source code seems to vary depending on:

• the memory architecture of the target computer,
• the architecture and communication pathways to the display controller,
• character glyph height and width in pixels and
• the amount of memory for bitmap storage and what measures are taken to make that as small as possible.

A brief overview of bitmap fonts

A generic bitmap is a block of data in which individual bits are used to indicate a state of either on or off. One use of a bitmap is to store image data. Character glyphs can be created and stored as a collection of images, one for each character in the character set, so using a bitmap to encode and store each character image is a natural fit.

Bitmap fonts are bitmaps used to indicate how to display or print characters by turning on or off pixels or printing or not printing dots on a page. See Wikipedia Bitmap fonts

A bitmap font is one that stores each glyph as an array of pixels (that is, a bitmap). It is less commonly known as a raster font or a pixel font. Bitmap fonts are simply collections of raster images of glyphs. For each variant of the font, there is a complete set of glyph images, with each set containing an image for each character. For example, if a font has three sizes, and any combination of bold and italic, then there must be 12 complete sets of images.

A brief history of using bitmap fonts

The earliest user interface terminals such as teletype terminals used dot matrix printer mechanisms to print on rolls of paper. With the development of Cathode Ray Tube terminals bitmap fonts were readily transferable to that technology as dots of luminescence turned on and off by a scanning electron gun.

Earliest bitmap fonts were of a fixed height and width with the bitmap acting as a kind of stamp or pattern to print characters on the output medium, paper or display tube, with a fixed line height and a fixed line width such as the 80 columns and 24 lines of the DEC VT-100 terminal.

With increasing processing power, a more sophisticated typographical approach became available with vector fonts used to improve displayed text quality and provide improved scaling while also reducing memory required to describe the character glyphs.

In addition, while a matrix of dots or pixels worked fairly well for languages such as English, written languages with complex glyph forms were poorly served by bitmap fonts.

Representation of bitmap fonts in source code

There are a number of bitmap font file formats which provide a way to represent a bitmap font in a device independent description. For an example see Wikipedia topic - Glyph Bitmap Distribution Format

The Glyph Bitmap Distribution Format (BDF) by Adobe is a file format for storing bitmap fonts. The content takes the form of a text file intended to be human- and computer-readable. BDF is typically used in Unix X Window environments. It has largely been replaced by the PCF font format which is somewhat more efficient, and by scalable fonts such as OpenType and TrueType fonts.

Other bitmap standards such as XBM, Wikipedia topic - X BitMap, or XPM, Wikipedia topic - X PixMap, are source code components that describe bitmaps however many of these are not meant for bitmap fonts specifically but rather other graphical images such as icons, cursors, etc.

As bitmap fonts are an older format many times bitmap fonts are wrapped within another font standard such as TrueType in order to be compatible with the standard font subsystems of modern operating systems such as Linux and Windows.

However embedded systems that are running on the bare metal or using an RTOS will normally need the raw bitmap character image data in the form similar to the XBM format. See Encyclopedia of Graphics File Formats which has this example:

Following is an example of a 16x16 bitmap stored using both its X10 and X11 variations. Note that each array contains exactly the same data, but is stored using different data word types:

Is this a solution?

Fiddle: http://sqlfiddle.com/#!18/12e9a0/9

Try to delete node modules directory and then run

The rules are simple: You include the header files you need. The documentation for any API call includes information on which header to include.

I don't know whether it is always an error to include both and . You would have to consult the documentation for every symbol used by the code to verify.

As noted, though, the Windows SDK header files aren't exclusively used by a C or C++ compiler. The Resource Compiler is another client of those header files. Including after is potentially not even superfluous in this case.

Try this function -

This can get complicated since Cloud functions can be multi-regional and scale up and down as your apps need, from our experience it was about a 30-minute cooldown.

To quote the documentation:

The environment running a function instance is typically resilient and reused by subsequent function invocations, unless the number of instances is being scaled down (due to lack of ongoing traffic), or your function crashes.

You can find this and more, here: https://cloud.google.com/functions/docs/concepts/exec#function_instance_lifespan