Former | fully customizable Swift library | REST library
kandi X-RAY | Former Summary
kandi X-RAY | Former Summary
Click HERE to get started with filing a bug report. Please use this template to ensure that your issue doesn't get closed due to lack of information.
Support
Quality
Security
License
Reuse
Top functions reviewed by kandi - BETA
Currently covering the most popular Java, JavaScript and Python libraries. See a Sample of Former
Former Key Features
Former Examples and Code Snippets
meta = self._download_json(url, video_id)
{
...
"summary": "some fancy summary text",
...
}
description = meta.get('summary') # correct
description = meta['summary'] # incorrect
description = self._search_regex(
r']+id="titl
youtube-dl -o - "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BaW_jenozKcj" | vlc -
def function(func=None,
input_signature=None,
autograph=True,
jit_compile=None,
reduce_retracing=False,
experimental_implements=None,
experimental_autograph_options=None,
def defun(func=None,
input_signature=None,
autograph=True,
experimental_autograph_options=None,
reduce_retracing=False):
"""Compiles a Python function into a callable TensorFlow graph.
`defun` (short for "
def locate_tensor_element(formatted, indices):
"""Locate a tensor element in formatted text lines, given element indices.
Given a RichTextLines object representing a tensor and indices of the sought
element, return the row number at which the
Community Discussions
Trending Discussions on Former
QUESTION
I saw a video about speed of loops in python, where it was explained that doing sum(range(N))
is much faster than manually looping through range
and adding the variables together, since the former runs in C due to built-in functions being used, while in the latter the summation is done in (slow) python. I was curious what happens when adding numpy
to the mix. As I expected np.sum(np.arange(N))
is the fastest, but sum(np.arange(N))
and np.sum(range(N))
are even slower than doing the naive for loop.
Why is this?
Here's the script I used to test, some comments about the supposed cause of slowing done where I know (taken mostly from the video) and the results I got on my machine (python 3.10.0, numpy 1.21.2):
updated script:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Oct-16 at 17:42From the cpython source code for sum
sum initially seems to attempt a fast path that assumes all inputs are the same type. If that fails it will just iterate:
QUESTION
My question is very similar to this question that has already been asked and answered but is not 100% up-to-date.
We used the solution from Chris Gaskill for quite some time and it suited us perfectly because we wanted to redirect requests that contain more than one path segment (i.e. /foo/bar
)
From Spring Boot 2.4 on, Boot uses the PathPatternParser
instead of the AntPathMatcher
, wherein the former does not support **
at the start of a pattern anymore (see docs).
Is there some other solution to get the same behavior? What do you use to redirect all requests, that did not match anything else, to the index.html
of the Angular app?
This is the code of the controller that forwards the requests.
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Feb-23 at 15:02Have you tried to implement redirection on Angular side? In my application I've solved this like:
QUESTION
I have a data frame containing a shape-file that I want to merge with another data-set that contains years. I'm interested in adding a variable with years to the former while all other variables remain the same for each year. I'm not sure how to do this.
As an example, say I have the following data-set:
...ANSWER
Answered 2022-Jan-09 at 19:08We can create a list
column grouped by 'code' or 'id' and then unnest
the list
QUESTION
There are a number of different Q/A's regarding this topic on SO, but none that I have been able to find that fit my use-case. I am also very surprised that RStudio / the Shiny developers themselves have not come out with some documentation on how to do this. Regardless, take this example application:
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Dec-16 at 23:55A few things edited and it's working:
- using
dir
instead ofls
inside thezip::zip
call to show the contents of the temp directory (ls
lists R environment rather than directory contents) - as a further suggestion: making a new, unique folder inside
tempdir()
to ensure only relevant files are added.
QUESTION
Consider the following code, running on an ARM Cortex-A72 processor (optimization guide here). I have included what I expect are resource pressures for each execution port:
Instruction B I0 I1 M L S F0 F1.LBB0_1:
ldr q3, [x1], #16
0.5
0.5
1
ldr q4, [x2], #16
0.5
0.5
1
add x8, x8, #4
0.5
0.5
cmp x8, #508
0.5
0.5
mul v5.4s, v3.4s, v4.4s
2
mul v5.4s, v5.4s, v0.4s
2
smull v6.2d, v5.2s, v1.2s
1
smull2 v5.2d, v5.4s, v2.4s
1
smlal v6.2d, v3.2s, v4.2s
1
smlal2 v5.2d, v3.4s, v4.4s
1
uzp2 v3.4s, v6.4s, v5.4s
1
str q3, [x0], #16
0.5
0.5
1
b.lo .LBB0_1
1
Total port pressure
1
2.5
2.5
0
2
1
8
1
Although uzp2
could run on either the F0 or F1 ports, I chose to attribute it entirely to F1 due to high pressure on F0 and zero pressure on F1 other than this instruction.
There are no dependencies between loop iterations, other than the loop counter and array pointers; and these should be resolved very quickly, compared to the time taken for the rest of the loop body.
Thus, my intuition is that this code should be throughput limited, and considering the worst pressure is on F0, run in 8 cycles per iteration (unless it hits a decoding bottleneck or cache misses). The latter is unlikely given the streaming access pattern, and the fact that arrays comfortably fit in L1 cache. As for the former, considering the constraints listed on section 4.1 of the optimization manual, I project that the loop body is decodable in only 8 cycles.
Yet microbenchmarking indicates that each iteration of the loop body takes 12.5 cycles on average. If no other plausible explanation exists, I may edit the question including further details about how I benchmarked this code, but I'm fairly certain the difference can't be attributed to benchmarking artifacts alone. Also, I have tried to increase the number of iterations to see if performance improved towards an asymptotic limit due to startup/cool-down effects, but it appears to have done so already for the selected value of 128 iterations displayed above.
Manually unrolling the loop to include two calculations per iteration decreased performance to 13 cycles; however, note that this would also duplicate the number of load and store instructions. Interestingly, if the doubled loads and stores are instead replaced by single LD1
/ST1
instructions (two-register format) (e.g. ld1 { v3.4s, v4.4s }, [x1], #32
) then performance improves to 11.75 cycles per iteration. Further unrolling the loop to four calculations per iteration, while using the four-register format of LD1
/ST1
, improves performance to 11.25 cycles per iteration.
In spite of the improvements, the performance is still far away from the 8 cycles per iteration that I expected from looking at resource pressures alone. Even if the CPU made a bad scheduling call and issued uzp2
to F0, revising the resource pressure table would indicate 9 cycles per iteration, still far from actual measurements. So, what's causing this code to run so much slower than expected? What kind of effects am I missing in my analysis?
EDIT: As promised, some more benchmarking details. I run the loop 3 times for warmup, 10 times for say n = 512, and then 10 times for n = 256. I take the minimum cycle count for the n = 512 runs and subtract from the minimum for n = 256. The difference should give me how many cycles it takes to run for n = 256, while canceling out the fixed setup cost (code not shown). In addition, this should ensure all data is in the L1 I and D cache. Measurements are taken by reading the cycle counter (pmccntr_el0
) directly. Any overhead should be canceled out by the measurement strategy above.
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Nov-06 at 13:50First off, you can further reduce the theoretical cycles to 6 by replacing the first mul
with uzp1
and doing the following smull
and smlal
the other way around: mul
, mul
, smull
, smlal
=> smull
, uzp1
, mul
, smlal
This also heavily reduces the register pressure so that we can do an even deeper unrolling (up to 32 per iteration)
And you don't need v2
coefficents, but you can pack them to the higher part of v1
Let's rule out everything by unrolling this deep and writing it in assembly:
QUESTION
I'm wondering if it is legal/safe to modify intent(in)
dummy arguments through pointers associated with corresponding actual arguments. Specifically when the pointer association was established before the subroutine call.
For example, is the following OK (it seems to work fine with gfortran)?
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Nov-03 at 11:58You are not allowed to change the value of an intent(in)
object in this way. The compiler does not have to (be able to) tell you that you are doing something wrong. (Further, it is an unreasonable expectation to have on a compiler that it should be able to detect all cases where an illegal change is made.)
The dummy argument var
is a non-pointer object, and this means that its components also have the same intent attribute. You are trying to define var
and its component var%A1
by the assignment var%A2(:,:) = 42
because var%A2
is pointer associated with my%A1
(through the argument association of var
with my
); through argument association of var
and my
, definition of my%A1
is definition of var%A1
.
This is a violation of the statement that (F2018 8.5.10 p2):
The INTENT (IN) attribute for a nonpointer dummy argument specifies that it shall neither be defined nor become undefined during the invocation and execution of the procedure.
However, this is not a numbered constraint or syntax rule so the compiler is not required to be capable of diagnosing the violation. Where a compiler is required to be capable of diagnosing a violation for changing var
is in (F2018 C844 (R826)):
A nonpointer object with the INTENT (IN) attribute shall not appear in a variable definition context (19.6.7).
A variable definition context is specific, and the assignment statement of the question is not a variable definition context for var
or var%A1
. An assignment such as var%A1=42
(which you note your compiler complains about) is appearance, of var%A1
(but not var
), in a variable definition context.
You can also wonder whether the aliasing restrictions come into play.
In summary, it is possible to hide changes to a dummy variable with intent(in)
from your compiler. Just as programmers don't like being tricked, your compiler doesn't have to still be your friend if you do this. The compiler can assume var
doesn't change value during the subroutine and it owes you nothing if you find a way to subvert that.
QUESTION
I'm attempting to solve a very simple problem - find strings in an array which only contain certain letters. However, I've run up against something in the behavior of regular expressions and/or grep
that I don't get.
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Nov-02 at 13:15Both fails
are fixed with the addition of anchors ^
and $
and quantifier +
These both work:
QUESTION
I have been testing my iOS app on my physical iPhone XS for quite some time now and all of a sudden it threw an error when I tried to run it saying:
"APP NAME" is no longer available.
So I went to re-build via Xcode into my device again to reinstall it. But I was getting an error message saying "Untrusted Developer".
So I tried to go to the Settings > General > VPN and Device Management screen to see if I need to 'Trust' my own developer profile again. But it's not appearing on that screen or any other new developer profile for that matter.
Did a bit of research and tried to troubleshoot. One of the solutions I've found and worked was to actually create a new developer account and use that to build and install the app on my device. I does work but I don't want to use another developer account to to build this app as the bundle identifier that I wanted to use was already tied up to that old account. And I have a bunch of other apps tied up to that old account as well.
The other reason why the above solution also wouldn't be ideal as I already have months worth of data in my device that was saved in that app. If created a new build using a new account it wouldn't be able to access the data of the old app built using the other account.
Just to note, that old account was formerly a paid account but now it expired. But I didn't have that problem until recently. So I am guessing it has something to do with the recent iOS 15 beta builds.
I will be filing a bug report for this. But does anyone have any idea or workaround to get rid of this issue? Any information that could potentially point me towards the right direction would be appreciated. Thanks!
I've filed this as a bug on AppleFeedback Assitant. They've reached out to me to ask for logs and the certificate I used to re-build the project. I'm guessing this this a bug and they are trying to fix it.
...ANSWER
Answered 2021-Sep-23 at 00:49I managed to fix this issue.
Xcode -> Preferences -> Accounts -> Manage Certificates -> + -> Apple Development
and then make a new certificate
My situation might be different from yours but here were the symptoms I was seeing. I was able to sign random Github projects and run them on my phone. I also have a paid developer account. I never saw anything related to my app in the VPN & Device Management
settings on my iPhone and I still don't.
QUESTION
I have a list of strings that I want to sort by two custom key functions in Python 3.6. Comparing the multi-sort approach (sorting by the lesser key then by the major key) to the multi-key approach (taking the key as the tuple (major_key, lesser_key)
), I could see the latter being more than 2x slower than the former, which was a surprise as I thought they are equivalent. I would like to understand why this is so.
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Oct-20 at 06:11QUESTION
In C++20, some ranges have both const
and non-const
begin()/end()
, while others only have non-const
begin()/end()
.
In order to enable the range adapters that wraps the former to be able to use begin()/end()
when it is const
qualified, some range adapters such as elements_view
, reverse_view
and common_view
all provide constrained const
-qualified begin()/end()
functions, for example:
ANSWER
Answered 2021-Oct-09 at 03:58Recent SG9 discussion on LWG3564 concluded that the intended design is that x
and as_const(x)
should be required to be substitutable with equal results in equality-preserving expressions for which both are valid. In other words, they should be "equal" in the [concepts.equality] "same platonic value" sense. Thus, for instance, it is not valid for x
and as_const(x)
to have entirely different elements.
The exact wording and scope of the rule will have to await a paper, and we'll have to take care to avoid banning reasonable code. But certainly things like "x
is a range of pairs but as_const(x)
is a range of ints" are not within any reasonable definition of "reasonable".
Community Discussions, Code Snippets contain sources that include Stack Exchange Network
Vulnerabilities
No vulnerabilities reported
Install Former
Support
Reuse Trending Solutions
Find, review, and download reusable Libraries, Code Snippets, Cloud APIs from over 650 million Knowledge Items
Find more librariesStay Updated
Subscribe to our newsletter for trending solutions and developer bootcamps
Share this Page