orderly | : hospital : : ambulance : Lightweight Reproducible | BPM library

Since your .then(()=>...) doesn't return a Promise, the await keyword at the beginning does nothing. Node has started the Promises of getting the h3's, getting their text content, and logging them, but your misplaced await doesn't tell Node to wait for all that to finish. You'll want to await getting the elements, then synchronously loop through all the elements, awaiting the text, then synchronously print the text, and finally synchronously print "...Task Complete!"

The documentation says that match_fun should be a "Vectorized function given two columns, returning TRUE or FALSE as to whether they are a match." It's not TRUE or FALSE, it's a function that returns TRUE or FALSE. If we switch your order, we can use stringr::str_detect, which does return TRUE or FALSE as required.

You can use column layout (or flex layout):

• all three threads start
• showbar and showpython pause on the first iteration of their for loops
  • they pause because lock.acquire() blocks until the locks are released and these locks were acquired in the main thread before they were started.
• showfoo acquires a lock; does something; then releases a different lock
  • this allows one of the other threads to acquire the lock; do something; release a different lock.

The way you designed the lock acquisition and release causes the threads to run sequentially.

You are right, you can develop a VSTO based add-in where you may handle the NewMailEx event of the Application class. This event fires once for every received item that is processed by Microsoft Outlook. The item can be one of several different item types, for example, MailItem, MeetingItem, or SharingItem.

The NewMailEx event fires when a new message arrives in the Inbox and before client rule processing occurs. You can use the Entry ID returned in the EntryIDCollection array to call the NameSpace.GetItemFromID method and process the item. Use this method with caution to minimize the impact on Outlook performance.

To save the attached files you can use the MailItem.Attachments property which returns an Attachments object that represents all the attachments for the specified item. Use the Attachment.SaveAsFile method which saves the attachment to the specified path.

Non-empty collections like lists are always considered True in Python.

From the documentation:

Any object can be tested for truth value, for use in an if or while condition or as operand of the Boolean operations below.

By default, an object is considered true unless its class defines either a __bool__() method that returns False or a __len__() method that returns zero, when called with the object. Here are most of the built-in objects considered false:

• constants defined to be false: None and False.
• zero of any numeric type: 0, 0.0, 0j, Decimal(0), Fraction(0, 1) empty sequences and
• collections: '', (), [], {}, set(), range(0)

You're right that this could seem a little weird in some circumstances:

Try using conditions in class value.

For example:

There are three approaches to size management with UDP:

• Give each message a size, and prefix your submissions with such size - you will keep reading until you have read size bytes.
• Send the whole message in the single UDP packet - quite feasible if message size is less than MTU size (best avoided for messages longer than MTU and impossible for messages longer than max unsigned short)
• Introduce a terminator in the message, which delineates end of message. Often impractical.

In your case, option 2 seems feasible. Your message size is 256 bytes - well within standard MTU - and could be send in a single go. You will have to first assemble the message in the buffer, and than send the whole buffer.

Please note, your loop for data reading from the file seems broken to me. You can only read less bytes than requested if there is less bytes in the file, but in this case your eof check will return true. I would be very surprised to learn that you have observed your file reading loop to execute more than once.

There are only two quirks in the logic of the for loop.

• You tried the matches for each individual line, but since there's no single line which contains both area and year, you got nothing. Remedy: Just operate on the dataset as a whole.
• You would iterate over all years for one area; this way, after the first found area all year matches would be consumed. Remedy: For each area, only get one year match.