redone | A * correct * implementation of regular expression matching | Regex library

Say I have a custom matcher that checks to see if an object is a valid RGB tuple -- let's call it valid_rgb_tuple. The matcher takes an object as an argument and validates it. I'd like to be able to use that in a oneliner where the subject is expected to be a tuple. Ideally that would look/read something like this:

I have integrated OpenVINO and PyQt5 to do the inference job as shown in the image on Windows 11 with openvino_2021.4.689 version.

I reference this GitHub to finish YOLOv4 inference with NCS2.

The following is my inference engine code.

I'm setting up my environment to code in react-native, and when I run

I have created a Token Interceptor in Angular which I use to refresh my JWT token. Unfortunately, I don't know why, several calls fail (error 401), and when the interceptor retrieves the new token, only the last one that failed is redone. This means that it misses some calls and my UI is not filling properly.

I try to leave you a few pieces of code and a photo.

And this is my token interceptor:

I have a Google Form whereby a customer can make multiple requests in one go, rather than using the "Submit another response" function, as this is preferential time wise.

Therefore the data formats across 1 row only as follows into the linked Google Sheet.

I am trying to work out a method, ideally using Google Apps Script or otherwise using formulas, to transpose the data, repeating the timestamp and email address but otherwise "chunking" out the submissions in columns 3, 4, 5 and then 6, 7, 8 into separate rows, for example.

It must iterate down every row so therefore any new submissions must be appended to the existing list in the Target Sheet, or the whole lot can be redone each day on a timed trigger to transpose the list out of hours.

Example sheet

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sMMdl26HS2Bfsb4iYLfOQt6ydMW5qVKXyy3UJ-tEdaU/edit?usp=sharing

We have an existing VBA solution but need to transfer to Cloud based using Google Sheets.

Any support or ideas would be welcome. Thanks.

I'm building a react app, and it's the first time I've done a really big project. I've just heard someone in a video briefly mention that large companies like facebook have a few button designs, which I guess they then import into there project. Is this so the buttons across the app have consistent designs, colors, etc. If so, will this be better or worse for performance if I just make 2-3 button designs and then import them into other components when I need them. I've currently got about 100 buttons in my app, which all look fairly similar, but aren't completely the same, mostly just the padding and height are different, but I've given every button a unique className and then redone the css for every button. This seems like it would be bad for performance and also the overall design of the app.

This is how I've made the new button component, would this be correct and should I even make button components for my app?

I want to get your opinion on a design decision. I need to prepare a project that makes the crud operations with weather sensors and I need the communicate each weather sensor with NTCIP in the database and get information like temperature, humidity, etc.

the problem is scaling. In my architecture, I write a .net core microservice and that has a own separate database. This weather station microservice reads all weather stations from the database then communicates each sensor via IP. I open a thread for each record and these threads do the data communication over IP. When I replicate this microservice, because of the same algorithm all microservice works with the same data. My goal is to distribute database data to replicated microservice by count. For example, if there are 100 weather station records in the database and I have 2 replicas I need to distribute 50 records to the first one, and 50 to the second one. Also, I need to if I change the replica count, the distribution will be redone. I search the internet, and I found a apache helix, but it's more complicated for this operation. Please give me advice. thanks a lot

I have a parent component Dash and child one Called Team in the render method (both are classes)

in it's render I have:

I'm trying to implement a globally accessible undo/redo functionality in my Rust app via the undo crate. Additionally I am using enum_dispatch to handle the dynamic dispatch of my dyn AppActions, such as AddName or AddPhoneNumber.

However I'm running into the issue of needing to mutably borrow self more than once when I want to add a phone number or add a name to state. This is because I need to mutate some field of my state (names or phone_numbers) to add some data, and I need to mutate history so we have a record of these changes which can be undone/redone.But this leads me to mutably borrowing our state twice, once for the history, and once for whatever field we're wanting to add data to. Now I know one solutions to this problem, as discussed here, is borrowing specific fields from self, rather then the whole self. But for this approach to work we need to provide our AppAction implementers with some type attributes, so that when we pass them into self.history.apply(), we can also pass in self.names or self.phone_numbers, which have types Vec and Vec, respectively.

This sounds simple enough, but as it's unclear to me how to do this given the limitations of enum_dispatch. I thought that I could add associated types to AppAction , similar to the way undo::Action has associated typesTarget,Output, and Error. So for AddName, Target=Vec and for AddPhoneNumber Targe=Vec. But for reasons described in this issue, enum_dispatch does not allow you to add associated types to your trait definition. Is there some other way to add these type arguments to my AppAction implementers, AddName and AddPhoneNumber?

In the referenced issue, OP mentions:

I should wrap the associated type in another enum. Maybe it's not necessary for enum_dispatch to provide a general solution. Users should customize themselves. I'll close the issue.

However I'm not really sure what they mean by this or how to apply this to my particular case. Dopes OP suggest that we have some Enum, AppActionType as Target instead of AppState? Or is OP essentially suggesting not to use enum_dispatch for cases where implementer methods need differently typed values?

If anyone would like to play with the actual code, I put it in this repo.