machinery | A systems management toolkit for Linux | Configuration Management library

So I'm looking at a Java project for my university and the code we are working with has this syntax that I have never seen before:

I see patchesStrategicMergein my kustomization.yaml file, but not getting it clearly, like whats its need or why we require that?

kustomization.yaml

i am building this machinery page for someone and i came across this issue, i am using the latest version of tailwind css and react btw.

For now i am using a plain object to store the items, like this:

I have a dataset of tens of thousands of dialogues / conversations between a customer and customer support. These dialogues, which could be forum posts, or long-winded email conversations, have been hand-annotated to highlight the sentence containing the customers problem. For example:

Dear agent, I am writing to you because I have a very annoying problem with my washing machine. I bought it three weeks ago and was very happy with it. However, this morning the door does not lock properly. Please help

Dear customer.... etc

The highlighted sentence would be:

However, this morning the door does not lock properly.

1. What approaches can I take to model this, so that in future I can automatically extract the customers problem? The domain of the datasets are broad, but within the hardware space, so it could be appliances, gadgets, machinery etc.
2. What is this type of problem called? I thought this might be called "intent recognition", but most guides seem to refer to multiclass classification. The sentence either is or isn't the customers problem. I considered analysing each sentence and performing binary classification, but I'd like to explore options that take into account the context of the rest of the conversation if possible.
3. What resources are available to research how to implement this in Python (using tensorflow or pytorch)

I found a model on HuggingFace which has been pre-trained with customer dialogues, and have read the research paper, so I was considering fine-tuning this as a starting point, but I only have experience with text (multiclass/multilabel) classification when it comes to transformers.

I am in the process of writing a binary processing module for SPIR-V shaders to fix alignment issues with float4x3[6] matrices because of driver bugs. Right now i have:

• injected necessary appropriate OpTypes and OpTypePointers.
• processed the binary to change constant buffer members from float4x3[6] to vec4[18]
• injected function properly unpacking vec4[18] into float4x3[6] accepting vec4[18] as a pointer to Uniform array 18.
• created Private storage qualifier matrix unpack targets as OpVariables.(Private in SPIR-V just means invocation-level global...).
• injected preambles about composite extraction and construction to call my new function. (since from what im seeing we need to copy arguments from constant buffers to functions always, so thats what I do).
• called the function from entrypoint, for every float4x3[6] member to have ready unpacked matrices when main() starts.
• changed OpAccessChain operations that referenced given members in constant buffers and swapped them with access chains referencing my new Private targets.

But now i ran into trouble. It looks like a function in SPIR-V can either accept Private or Function storage qualifier pointers. Not both. Is there any way i can tell SPIR-V "Yeah, you can dump both of those storage classes here as arguments"?

Or do i need to rework my solution to utilize Function storage class matrix targets, and inject them and calls to unpack them every single time they are used in a new function? This seems much less elegant since there might be way more unpack operations then. And much less hassle-free, since i would have to scan every OpFunction block separately and inject OpVariables with Function storage into every block that uses the matrices.

My problem is, after all this machinery is done my targets are living as OpTypePointer of Private Storage Duration. Therefore i cannot use them in ANY SPIR-V function generated from HLSL, since they take OpTypePointers of Function duration. My unpack function is sole exception to this since i injected it directly in SPIR-V asm, byte by byte and was able to precisely tune OpFunctionParameters in header.

I am new to Arrow and try to establish my mental model of how its effects system works; in particular, how it leverages Kotlin's suspend system. My very vague understanding is as follows; if would be great if someone could confirm, clarify, or correct it:

Because Kotlin does not support higher-kinded types, implementing applicatives and monads as type classes is cumbersome. Instead, arrow derives its monad functionality (bind and return) for all of Arrow's monadic types from the continuation primitive offered by Kotlin's suspend mechanism. Ist this correct? In particular, short-circuiting behavior (e.g., for nullable or either) is somehow implemented as a delimited continuation. I did not quite get which particular feature of Kotlin's suspend machinery comes into play here.

If the above is broadly correct, I have two follow-up questions: How should I contain the scope of non-IO monadic operations? Take a simple object construction and validation example:

I'm trying to use machinery as a distributed task queue and would like to deploy separate workers for different groups of tasks. E.g. have a worker next to the database server running database related tasks and a number of workers on different servers running cpu/memory intensive tasks. Only the documentation isn't really clear on how one wold do this.

I initially tried running the workers without registering unwanted tasks on to them but this resulted in the worker repeatedly consuming the unregistered task and requeuing it with he following message:

I need, from a Java program, to run another program (a plain commandline executable), wait for it to finish, check the exit code. This can be done easily enough:

An imperative programmer for a long time, every so often I look back in on Haskell and play a little more and learn a little more.

A question arose when thinking about a possible project:

How to implement data that I explicitly want to change in a language that treats data as immutable?

A specific case is the text that is edited by a text editor. Data.Text is available but it says things like appending a character to the end of a text involves copying the entire text over. Because of things like that, I'm wondering if Data.Text is the appropriate structure to use to implement text who's purpose is to change.

Is there a generalized thinking that addresses this sort of thing?

Over the years, I've written two implementations of text machinery in C#. One used a linked list of blocks of 256 (or 512, I forget, it's been a while) characters, similar to what's described in the Sam text editor. The other is a slightly modified version of a design done by Niklaus Wirth (who got it from someone else) in the Oberon System where text is implemented by two files (one for the original text, the other for newly entered data) and a linked list of pieces that is used to assemble and edit the text. I used two .NET StringBuilders instead of files, only append to them, and the whole things performs much better that just using StringBuilders as the text itself.

Note: I have a reasonable working knowledge of laziness, strictness, tail-recursion, thunks. Fusion is less clear to me but I've read a little on it.

I have a good bit of experience with SQL so I don't have a problem with a compiler doing things I don't fully understand, but in that language I know how to conceptualize the problem better than I do in Hasell.