connotation | Connotation analysis in short messages

As it is written here

Environment variables are specific to the operating system you are using. They are injected into a pipeline in platform-specific ways. The format corresponds to how environment variables get formatted for your specific scripting platform.

On UNIX systems (macOS and Linux), environment variables have the format $NAME. On Windows, the format is %NAME% for batch and $env:NAME in PowerShell.

System and user-defined variables also get injected as environment variables for your platform. When variables are turned into environment variables, variable names become uppercase, and periods turn into underscores. For example, the variable name any.variable becomes the variable name $ANY_VARIABLE.

You should be able to access Windows env variable in one of this ways:

• %LIBRARYLOCATION%
• env:LIBRARYLOCATION

Which os this will work for you can depened how you call MSBuild.

You can check you variables calling env | sort from bash step.

And when I ran %PATH% from command line script I got:

and this when I ran '$env:PATH` from powershell task:

You probably want to try using random.sample(all_words, 10) and loop over to extend the output for subsequent weeks (changing 10 to the desired number of words). You will need to import random first.

As stated in the comments, you don't need dynamic SQL for that.

Also, storing numbers as strings is really bad practice – your queries get more complicated, and somebody could store non-numbers as well.

All that said, I thing your query ignored the fact that scientific notation could also be 1e-7 or 1e4.

So I think the query should contain

Posting answer supplied by @blami

Setting "Cloud.Core*.xml" ignored the file as expected. This was the solution for me!

The answer to your question, in my opinion, very much depends on how you design your domain, not how you implement CQRS. The way you present it, it seems that all these operations and aggregates are in the same Bounded Context but at first glance, I would think that there are 3 (naming is difficult!):

1. Order Management or Sales, where orders are placed
2. Warehouse Operations, where goods are packaged to be shipped
3. Shipments, where packages are put in trucks and leave

When an Order is Placed in Order Management, Warehouse reacts and starts the Packaging workflow. At this point, Warehouse should have all the data required to perform its logic, without needing the Order anymore.

The warehouse manager can then view a picking slip, select the lines they would like to ship, and then perform a PrepareShipment command.

To me, this clearly indicates the need for an aggregate that will ensure the invariants are respected. You cannot select items not present in the picking slip, you cannot select more items than the quantities specified, you cannot select items that have already been packaged in a previous package and so on.

A ShipmentPrepared event will then update the original order, and remove the relevant lines from the PickingSlipView.

I don't understand why you would modify the original order. Also, removing lines from a view is not a safe operation per se. You want to guarantee that concurrency doesn't cause a single item to be placed in multiple packages, for example. You guarantee that using an aggregate that contains all the items, generates the packaging instructions, and marks the items of each package safely and transactionally.

Acting as an intermediary between two commands

Aggregates execute the commands, they are not in between.

Viewing it from another angle, an indication that you need that aggregate is that the PrepareShippingCommand needs to create an aggregate (Shipping), and according to Udi Dahan, you should not create aggregate roots (out of thin air). Instead, other aggregate roots create them. So, it seems fair to say that there needs to be some aggregate, which ensures that the policies to create shippings are applied.

As a final note, domain design is difficult and you need to know the domain very well, so it is very likely that my proposed solution is not correct, but I hope the considerations I made on each step are helpful to you to come up with the right solution.

UPDATE after question update

I read a couple of times the updated question and updated several times my answer, but ended up every time with answers very specific to your example again and I'm most likely missing a lot of details to actually be helpful (I'd be happy to discuss it on another channel though). Therefore, I want to go back to the first sentence of your question to add an important comment that I missed:

an intermediary concept can purely exist in the read model, while providing a bridge between commands.

In my opinion, read models are disposable. They are not a single source of truth. They are a representation of the data to easily fulfil the current query needs. When these query needs change, old read models are deleted and new ones are created based on the data from the write models.

So, only based on this, I would recommend to not prepare a read model to facilitate your commands operations.

I think that your solution is here:

When a book of record is added a view model for each type of task is maintained. The data might be transposed, and would only include relevant info.

If I understand it correctly, what you should do here is not create view model, but create an Aggregate (or multiple). Then this aggregate can receive the commands, apply the business rules and mutate the state. So, instead of having a domain service reading data from "clever" read models and putting it all together, you have an aggregate which encapsulates the data it needs and the business logic.

I hope it makes sense. It's a broad topic and we could talk about it for hours probably.

You can always escape quotes inside of other quotes to prevent the nightmare of quote nesting.

"This is how you would \"fix\" certain \"quotation issues\""

My take is to use single quotes escaped inside of double quotes, even though usually single quotes work within double quotes.

"This is how you would \'fix\' certain \'quotation issues\'"

Ah wow, that's the problem with switching back and forth between languages, I forget the little things and make stupid mistakes like that. Problem solved, thanks for the help!

Let's focus on the rules:

First, void * still makes sense when you have to use a C library function or generally speaking to use any other extern "C" compatible function.

Next a std::byte array still allows individual access to any of its elements. Said differently this is legal: