entangle | native python parallel processing framework based on simple | GPU library

Edit: it seems clear that the whole scenario is simply to entangled to be solved properly, and the real problem lies in the piece of code that creates a bunch of objects without also naming them. Sorry for the inconvenience, I leave the whole thing up in case anybody runs into the same problem somewhere, sometime.

Assume I have a list of vectors, like

I have a livewire component, that implements the Spatie Media Library Pro component:

I have a form that displays a number of toggle switches.

The amount of switches is dynamic based on the "permissions" in a table. how do I bind these so that when they are clicked, the data is posted back to livewire? The 'Non-dynamic' answer I have found is x-data="{isChecked: @entangle('foo')}" but this obviously doesn't work if I have an unknown number of items and not a single 'foo'.

I have tried a method wire:click="update({{ $value->id }})" but this only passes back to livewire the id of the element that has been clicked, not it's state (on or off).

I would like to implement functionality for being able to search a QPlainTextEdit for a query string, and display all matched lines in a table. Selecting a row in the table should move the cursor to the correct line in the document.

Below is a working example that finds all matches and displays them in a table. How can I get to the selected line number in the string that the plaintextedit holds? I could instead use the match.capturedEnd() and match.capturedStart() to show the matches, but line numbers are a more intuitive thing to think of, rather than the character index matches.

I have a problem understanding how to separate aggregates in DDD. At least, I have a conflict of interests that I do not know how to solve. As far as I understand, in DDD an aggregate is defined as a transactional boundary that enforces invariants / consistency. However, this results in my aggregate being huge and difficult to maintain.

My use case is a system for processing e-commerce orders. The basic flow based on the business requirements is as follows:

1. External system (shopping cart) creates an Order, containing shipping address, billing address and line items.
2. The order is fulfilled by creating a FulfillmentOrder, which is sent to an external fulfillment service provider.
3. The external fulfillment service sends the goods and creates one or several Shipments for a given fulfillment order. Each shipment includes shipped line items, a departure country (the country of the warehouse of this external service) and a destination country (=== shipping address country)
4. An Invoice is created for each shipment, with VAT / sales tax calculated based on departure and destination country of the Shipment.

This is a simplified version of the domain. As you can see, there is a sequence of well-defined steps, but there are some entanglements.... Steps depend on data from previous steps and different entities. Most importantly: the relationship between Order and Shipment (and therefore Order and Invoice) is 1:many and not 1:1.

Based on the aggregate definition above I would design the described use case as one Bounded Context (order processing) with Order being my aggregate root and Fulfillment Order, Shipments and Invoices being collections of entities managed by the aggregate root.

There are several invariants, that span across all multiple entities, for example:

• Total sum of all invoices must not exceed the order total.
• You cannot create an invoice that includes a non exiting order item.
• A shipment item qty must not exceed the qty of the fulfillment order that triggered the shipment.

Having the order as the sole aggregate root allows enforcing these invariants. But it results in the order aggregate being huge and hard to maintain.

On the other hand I could model Order, Fulfillment Order, Shipment and Invoice as aggregates each. This would make each aggregate slimmer and more focused. But I lose the ability to enforce the invariants above (which is obviously bad for business, but also against DDD principles)

Is there any guidance in domain modelling in which direction to go or some comparisons of benefits / drawbacks of strategies?

TL;DR: I cannot remove or adjust xticks from inset_axis.

I was trying to prepare a zoom-in plot, where a box will display a zoomed version of the plot. However, the x-ticks of the zoomed in plot were too entangled and I decided to manually assign them.

This is a snip from the original plot.

So I tried the following lines:

I have been tweaking with quantum teleportation in python qiskit. One extra thing that I have done in the following diagram is the measurement of q330 at the very beggining.

I am doing this because I wanted to see if the measurement is always same for q33₀ and q33₂. But that is not possible later part because q33₀ gets modified.

One alternative way is to introduce a q33₃ and get it entangled with q33₀ and measure q33₃ later along with q33₂.

My question: I am a bit doubtful that my current implementation is wrong because I am collapsing q33₀ before the teleportation. That's not what you do teleportation for, right? You keep it's wave property and collapse it later on when needed. I want some comments on my doubt. Than you :)

Data is in melted form currently, and shows percentages of each material type at two locations:

My Greeting.

To put in context, my purpose of asking this question is to be able to render a child component inside a form based on the selected option of the Vue component as simple and silly as that.

For the sake of simplicity. I've made a snippet down here to expose what I'm trying to figure out. Basically, the aim is to get the component name to be rendered by using the computed property cardTypeComponent. However, I want to fathom the way cardTypeComponent is working, since I cannot see why, in one hand, the first return (return this.form) is giving the object (this.form) with the property I want (card_type) but on the other hand the second return (return this.form.card_type ? this.form.card_type + 'Compose' : '') is giving me an empty string, assuming this.form.card_type is undefined when it is clear looking at the first return that, in fact, is not taking it as undefined.

There is way more context, since once the option is selected there is a validation process from the server before setting the value inside this.form object. Moreover, the form interaction is through steps, so once the user select the option he has to click a button to reach the form fields that corresponds to that type card selected, therefore the component is not going to be rendered the very first moment the user selects an option as in the snippet approach. However, it would entangle what I'm asking. Thanks beforehand.

It is better to use the Fiddle link below.