fence | based request library that provide a serises of APIs | Reactive Programming library

The two functions are semantically identical and do exactly the same blocking behavior.

The second is slightly better. vkQueueWaitIdle is kind of a debug and out-of-hotspot feature. It might incur a hidden second submit to signal the implicit fence.

You don't need to reset fence that you subsequently destroy anyway. And you are creating it presignaled, which is a bug. Also you forgot to pass it to the vkQueueSubmit.

Best substitute for goto

You can use SharesPreference to notify triggered geoFenceId to MainActivity.

This would have been a lot easier with negative lookahead, but RE2 doesn't support it apparently. This handles many spaces between words and skips spaces, but does include an extra space on the value, sometimes, if there are multiple spaces between value and the next key token.

For normal stores to WB memory that are both within the same cache line: yes persistence order matches x86-TSO global-observability order, see Is clflush or clflushopt atomic when system crash？. Otherwise that's not guaranteed.

It seems you mean A is fully contained within one cache line, and B within a separate one.

Without SFENCE, after a crash it would be possible to see the effect of B but not A. clwb isn't ordered, so the later one could make its store persistent first. That's what the manual is pointing out with clwb's lack of ordering wrt. normal stores.

So according to TSO write(B) happened means write(A) happened (may be it is in store buffer).

No, x86-TSO ordering is about order of commit from store buffer to L1d, the pointer of global observability. That's of course totally separate from eventual write-back (via eviction or clwb) to DRAM. Store uops can execute (write their address+data to the store buffer) in any order, but can't commit until after retirement (i.e. when they're non-speculative). Additionally, that commit is restricted to happen in program order, i.e. the order store-buffer entries were allocated in during issue/rename/allocate.

meaning write(A)->write(B) are ordered and write(B)->clwb(B) are ordered, so how can clwb(B) bypass write(B) [thus violating the order constrain of manual] and happen before clwb(A) , thus causing effect of clwb(B) visible after a crash and not clwb(A)?

No, the "implicitly ordered with older stores ... to the same address" rule only guarantees that store + clwb to the same address will write-back a version of the line that includes that store-data. Otherwise it could write-back a copy of the line while the latest store was still in the store buffer or not even executed. It doesn't mean that the whole write-back has to finish before any later stores!

The order of operations that produces B but not A visible after a crash is the following:

• A and B execute in some order
• A and B commit to L1d cache once this core has MESI exclusive ownership of their respective lines, becoming globally visible to other cores.
• clwb instructions executed at some point, requesting the cache lines be written-back to DRAM at some point after the stores commit.
• write-back of line A start at some point after it commits to L1d, and same for line B. They could start in either order since clwb's order isn't guaranteed wrt. other clwb operations to other lines, although in practice they likely start in program oder.
• clwb-B finishes becoming persistent
• machine loses power, before the in-flight clwb-A made it to the persistence domain. You didn't request the clwb operations be ordered wrt. each other, so this is allowed.

In terms of asm instruction reordering, the following reordering is allowed:

During scene load, Godot will follow this execution order (as far as I can tell):

1. Allocate the new node, all variables are zeroed. regular variables (no onready) are initialized here to their default value (if they are export, the value is overwritten on step 3, custom setter or not), zeroed if no default value is specified.
2. Call _init on it.
3. Set its properties (initialize export variables, and any custom setters run).
4. If there are nodes that should be children, yet to do steps 1 to 3, follow this same steps for them.
5. IDE signal connections are made (this happens after all nodes have gone though steps 1 to 3, and yes, that includes connections from and to future children).
6. Add the node to its parent.
7. NOTIFICATION_PARENTED (18).
8. NOTIFICATION_ENTER_TREE (10).
9. Send tree_entered signal.
10. If there are nodes, that should be children, yet to do steps 6 to 9, follow this same steps for them.
11. NOTIFICATION_POST_ENTER_TREE (27).
12. Initialize any onready variables.
13. Call _ready on it.
14. NOTIFICATION_READY (13).
15. Send ready signal.

One important caveat is that NOTIFICATION_ENTER_TREE and tree_entered happen if the parent is in the SceneTree (e.g. if the node is created from script and yet to be added), also they do not happen in the editor (for tool scripts). Speaking of tool scripts, the steps from 11 on do not happen in the editor. Basically ready and enter_tree don't work on the editor.

See also:

• Node constants, and signals.
• Godot notifications.
• _notification (exampe).

Thus, when your setters call update (step 3 above), this line is yet to run (it will run on step 12):

It may not seem so but Vue template or render function not defined yet I am using neither? really solves your problem...

Runtime + Compiler vs. Runtime-only

It is important to understand that Vue templates are always compiled into pure JavaScrit (just try to paste your this.html sample into vue-compiler-online. As you are using vue files, you are probably using some bundler (Webpack for example - directly or via VueCLI) which is using vue-loader to do this compilation at build time. That's why Vue projects are usually using Vue build which does not includes template compiler.

BUT if you somewhere use template (even in such project), you need Vue package with compiler...

On the other hand, if only "Vue" functionality in the render output of markdown-it is the @click handler, you can do it without template (and without the overhead of Vue compiling perfectly static HTML produced by markdown-it into JS and then render it as static HTML again)

1. Remove your code_block/fence modification
2. Create a proper markdownComponent.vue (see below)
3. If the markdown comes from untrusted source (user) and you are passing html:true into markdown-it constructor, do proper sanitization of the markdown-it output
4. Render HTML produced by markdown-it with v-html

I get [nan, nan] for both inequality constraint and equality constraint.

As Russ mentioned, the problem is the cost being non-convex, and Drake incurred the wrong solver. For the moment, I would suggest to explicitly designate a solver. You could do

Your randomNum variable is only set once. So, every time you click the element, it sets the word to the same index.

Fix this by putting the random number generator inside the onClick, like so: