My hobbies and Interests are: chess, hiking, travel and developer events.
My hobbies and Interests are: chess, hiking, travel and developer events.
This project is a implementation of an article catalog in ANSI C with SQLite3.
This project is a implementation of a video store in ANSI C with SQLite3.
This project is a implementation of a bank system in C++ with MySQL.
This project is a implementation of a pharmaceutical system in C++ with MySQL.
This project is a collection of sorting algorithms in ANSI C.
This project is a implementation of Dijkstra algorithm in C++.
This project is a collection of searching algorithms in ANSI C.
This project is a implementation of a customer agenda in ANSI C with File I/O.
This project is a implementation of a book store in ANSI C with File I/O.
This project is a collection of encryption algorithms in ANSI C.


The Timing Game
Stop the watch when ms (the number after the decimal point) is 0
0:00.0
Start
Stop
Reset


Sleep Capture
This form will configure your Solar Server to capture a file and then sleep for a given interval. The captured file will then be posted to an Amazon S3 Bucket. Input a file name and interval and submit the form.
This form will configure your Solar Server to capture a file and then sleep for a given interval. The captured file will then be posted to an Amazon S3 Bucket. Input a file name and interval and submit the form.


DOUBTS TO BE CLARIFIED AS FOLLOW:
Name:
Email:
Password:
select a faculty to clarify your doubts:
Mr.rajesh:
Mrs.lasya:
Mr.ramesh:
Mrs.anu:
enter the doubt u hv:


Search
Preparing search index...
The search index is not available
mingo
Options
All
Public
Public/Protected
All
Inherited
Externals
Only exported
Menu
Globals
"operators/expression/date/index"
Module "operators/expression/date/index"
Index
References
$date
From
Parts
$date
From
String
$date
ToParts
$date
ToString
$day
OfMonth
$day
OfWeek
$day
OfYear
$hour
$millisecond
$minute
$month
$second
$week
$year
References
$date
From
Parts
Re-exports
$dateFromParts
$date
From
String
Re-exports
$dateFromString
$date
ToParts
Re-exports
$dateToParts
$date
ToString
Re-exports
$dateToString
$day
OfMonth
Re-exports
$dayOfMonth
$day
OfWeek
Re-exports
$dayOfWeek
$day
OfYear
Re-exports
$dayOfYear
$hour
Re-exports
$hour
$millisecond
Re-exports
$millisecond
$minute
Re-exports
$minute
$month
Re-exports
$month
$second
Re-exports
$second
$week
Re-exports
$week
$year
Re-exports
$year
Globals
"operators/expression/date/index"
$date
From
Parts
$date
From
String
$date
ToParts
$date
ToString
$day
OfMonth
$day
OfWeek
$day
OfYear
$hour
$millisecond
$minute
$month
$second
$week
$year
Generated using
TypeDoc


### shell '../shell.html' 'The JavaScript subclass Function'
JavaScript, as we're told, is not a class-based object-oriented language. There's little explicit support for the object-oriented notion of classes and inheritance. However, everything you can do with classes and inheritance in an explicitly class-based language like Java or C# can be done in JavaScript with constructor functions and delegation through the prototype chain. These relationships have to be set up programmatically at runtime using idiomatic JavaScript. Given JavaScript's highly dynamic nature this turns out to be pretty simple.
subclass
function
Simple nonetheless, I find it worthwhile to abstract the idiomatic JavaScript
away inside a function. This has the added bonus of making the inheritance
relationship more explicit in the code and it addresses a couple of JavaScript
"warts" in the process. Most of the JavaScript code I write is simple enough
that it doesn't need inheritance. Whenever I find I do need it, however, I always take
the time to write a function like the subclass
function below. It's pretty
simple, clocking in at a mere 6 lines of non-trivial JavaScript.
function subclass(constructor, superConstructor) { function surrogateConstructor() { } surrogateConstructor.prototype = superConstructor.prototype; var prototypeObject = new surrogateConstructor(); prototypeObject.constructor = constructor; constructor.prototype = prototypeObject; }
subclass
function
Suppose we have two JavaScript constructor functions: NamedItem
and
NamedNumberedItem
, where we want to be able to use NamedNumberedItem
objects anywhere we use NamedItem
objects (but not vice-versa). Furthermore,
we want NamedNumberedItem
to inherit NamedItem
functionality
rather than reimplementing it. In idiomatic JavaScript we'd express this relationship
something like:
NamedNumberedItem.prototype = new NamedItem("")
Using the subclass
function above, the same relationship can be expressed as:
subclass(NamedNumberedItem, NamedItem);
Below is an example implementation of the NamedItem
and NamedNumberedItem
"classes"
using the subclass
function. The example then creates instances of the two types of objects
and queries them to demonstrate that the subclass
function really does what you think it does.
// ---------------------------------------- class NamedItem
function NamedItem(name)
{
this.name = name;
}
NamedItem.prototype.getDescription = function ()
{
return this.name;
}
// ---------------------------------------- class NamedNumberedItem
subclass(NamedNumberedItem, NamedItem);
function NamedNumberedItem(name, number)
{
NamedItem.call(this, name);
this.number = number;
}
NamedNumberedItem.prototype.getDescription = function ()
{
return this.name + ":" + this.number;
}
var namedItem = new NamedItem("foo"); var namedNumberedItem = new NamedNumberedItem("foo", 1);
There should be no surprises. However, we should compare the behavior of the same code, only using idiomatic JavaScript to set up the inheritance relationship. I'll do that next.
// ---------------------------------------- class NamedItem
function NamedItem(name)
{
this.name = name;
}
NamedItem.prototype.getDescription = function ()
{
return this.name;
}
// ---------------------------------------- class NamedNumberedItem
NamedNumberedItem.prototype = new NamedItem("");
function NamedNumberedItem(name, number)
{
NamedItem.call(this, name);
this.number = number;
}
NamedNumberedItem.prototype.getDescription = function ()
{
return this.name + ":" + this.number;
}
var namedItem = new NamedItem("foo"); var namedNumberedItem = new NamedNumberedItem("foo", 1);
As the example code demonstrates, the two subclassing methods behave essentially the
same way, but they do differ on two key points: The handling of instance variables in the prototype and
the handling of the constructor
property. In both of these cases, I contend
that the behavior of the subclass
function makes more sense and is less
likely to lead to confusion.
The idiomatic JavaScript code
creates a NamedItem
object to serve as the prototype object for all objects
created by the NamedNumberedItem
constructor. This means that
NamedNumberedItem
objects inherit all the properties of the NamedItem
prototype. Some of these properties are class-wide properties shared by all members of
the NamedItem
"class", but other properties (the name
property) is
specic to that one object that is serving as the prototype.
Of course the problem is that while these properties may be instance properties to the prototype
object, they act like class properties to all of NamedNumberedItem
objects that
inherit them. This can be a problem when the inherited methods that work with those properties
expect them to act like instance properties. Imagine what can happen if such an inherited
property is a mutable value like an array. There's a big semantic difference between modifying
an array local to one object as opposed to modifying one shared by many objects.
Normally we get around this problem by having the subclass constructor chain to the superclass constructor before it does anything else. This way the superclass constructor gets to create instance properties that really are instance properties. These instance properties completely hide the ones in the prototype. So those properties may be superfluous but they're also harmless.
The subclass
function sidesteps this whole issue. Instead of calling the
superclass constructor function to create the prototype it uses a "surrogate"
constructor instead. To create a proper prototype chain, the surrogate constructor
"borrows" the prototype from the superclass constructor. However, it defines no
instance properties and equally importantly takes no arguments, regardless of how
many the superclass constructor itself takes. This solves two problems -- there
are no superfluous instance-properties-that-aren't-really-instance-properties in
the prototype, and the superclass
function is off the hook for knowing
how many and what kind of arguments to pass to the superclass constructor.
One nod that JavaScript does makes towards class-based object-oriented programming is
the instanceof
operator. This operator evaluates true if the first
argument, an object, has been constructed by the second argument, a constructor
function. It will also return true if the constructor was used to construct the
object's prototype, which is to say that there's something like a subclass relationship
between the two constructors.
You might expect that the use of the surrogate constructor would confound the
instanceof
operator. However, the instanceof
operator
relies on the prototype chain to determine "class" membership, rather than on an
object's constructor
property. There's a good reason for this, as
we'll see next.
constructor
Property
One place the two subclassing approaches disagree is the constructor
property.
In both examples, the NamedItem
object's constructor
properties each
evaluate to NamedItem
just as you would expect. In the example using the
subclass
function, the NamedNumberedItem
object's constructor
evaluates to NamedNumberedItem
, again, just as you would expect. In the idiomatic
JavaScript example, however, the NamedNumberedItem
object's constructor
property evaluates to NamedItem
-- the superclass. This is surprising, but it's
also consistent with the ECMAScript standard.
This is because the constructor property is not an instance property, but rather lives
in the prototype. More precisely it lives in a prototype. The problem here is that it's
missing from the NamedNumberedItem
prototype, which instead inherits the constructor property
defined in the NamedItem
prototype -- the value of which is the NamedItem
constructor. The problem, very simply, is that JavaScript automatically assigns constructor properties
to the default prototypes that it generates for functions. If you replace the default
prototype with one of your own -- as we did when we "subclassed" NamedItem
to
get NamedNumberedItem
-- then you get a prototype without a constructor instance property.
The prototype object instead inherits the constructor
property from its own prototype
object.
We could have corrected this after setting up the prototype, like so:
NamedNumberedItem.prototype = new NamedItem(""); NamedNumberedItem.prototype.constructor = NamedNumberedItem;
This is rarely done in practice. Since the constructor
property is rarely used, maybe it
doesn't hurt anything. However, when inspecting an arbitrary object in JavaScript the
constructor property is the only really convenient way you have of telling what kind of
object you have. This can make debugging unneccesarily complicated and confusing.


WITNESS LIST Appropriations-S/C on Regulatory Committee February 13, 2003-8:00A Budget For: Boatright, Anne (Texas Credit Union League, Capitol Credit Union) Sandberg, Eric (Texas Savings and Community Bankers Association) On: Amezquita, Michael (Self and Board of Tax Professional Examiners, Texas Assn. of Appraisal Districts, Cameron Appraisal District) Atkinson, Billy M. (Board of Public Accountancy) Beran, Douglas A. (Board of Barber Examiners) Bowden, Mance (OmniAmerican Credit Union) Brady, Jim (Cosmetology Commission) Briers, Stanley J. (Self and Texas Plumbing, Air Conditioning & Mechanical Contractors Association) Burnett, Dale (Structural Pest Control Board) Crawford, Denise Voigt (Securities Board) Feeney, Harold E. (Credit Union Department) Hatchel, John (Board of Plumbing Examiners) Hendricks, Cathy L. (Self and Board of Architectural Examiners) Herman, Richard L. (Board of Plumbing Examiners) Hsu, Victoria (Board of Professional Engineers) Humphrey, Antoinette Fontenot (Texas Cosmetology Commission) James, Randall S. (Department of Banking) Kuntz, Jr., William H. (Board of Professional Geoscientists) Kuntz, Jr., William H. (Department of Licensing and Regulation) Martinez, Rita (Structural Pest Control Board) Maxwell, Robert L. (Bob) (Board of Plumbing Examiners) Miller, Edward (Self and Board of Professional Geoscientists) Montoya, David (Board of Tax Professional Examiners) Morgan, John (Securities Board) Morrison, Lee (Structural Pest Control Board) Newberg, Stephanie (Department of Banking) Parker, Glenn D. (Board of Barber Examiners) Pettijohn, Leslie (Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner) Pledger, Jim (Savings and Loan Department) Ratzman, Jim (Credit Union Department) Smith, Sandy (Board of Professional Land Surveying) Spradlin, Tom (Board of Professional Geoscientists) Summers, Ed (Self and Board of Public Accounting) Thomson, C.B. (Ben) (Board of Professional Land Surveying) Treacy, William (Board of Public Accountancy) Vasquez, III, Leo R. (Department of Licensing and Regulation) Wofford, Margaret (Savings and Loan Department)


name: seccam
description: |
This app launches a virtual AP for managing security cameras.
net:
wifi:
type: wifi
intfName: wlan0
ssid: seccam
key: password
dhcp:
lease: 12h
start: 100
limit: 50
download:
url: https://github.com/ParadropLabs/Security-Cam


The

element contains text for which all line breaks and spaces are
preserved. It is typically presented in a monospaced font. Do not use

when a more semantically specific element is appropriate, such
as <codeblock>
.
Category: Body elements


Beats Solo3 With Apple W1 Chip for Just $129 Today [Was $300]
by Uzair GhaniFancy a pair of Beats Solo3 for cheap? Amazon is selling the great pair of headphones complete with Apple's W1 chip for just $129.
Beats Solo3 Sound Great Even After All These Years - Feature Same AirPods-Style Pairing
AirPods are absolutely wonderful in what they do and you can get the same experience on other headphones as well. We're obviously talking about the Beats Solo3 here which pack the same W1 chip as the original AirPods, allowing you to pair just once and everything will by synced across devices in a matter of minutes. You don't even have to press and hold the pairing button in order to do that, just power them on and the headphone will show up right away on your iPhone or iPad.
Deal Alert: Fully Unlocked Galaxy S10 $100 Off + Free Galaxy Buds [$699 Only]
Apart from that, the Beats Solo3 sound great too. Unlike previous Beats, these aren't quite bass heavily and strike a wonderful balance with most people. But obviously, they command a price point that is somewhat unjustified, given that you can get a far better wireless experience with the AirPods. Not today though, as you can get the Solo3 headphone for just $129, instead of the usual $299 asking price.
There is no special discount code here, nor an on-page coupon code that you have to clip. Just go to Amazon, choose the color in which you want these headphones and you are good to go. We're sure a deal doesn't get any more straightforward than this.
Buy Beats Solo3 Wireless On-Ear Headphones - Was $299, now just $129


The Learning Problem
Learning:
A computer program is said to learn from experience \(E\) with respect to some class of tasks \(T\) and performance measure \(P\), if its performance at tasks in \(T\), as measured by \(P\), improves with experience \(E\).
-
The Basic Premise/Goal of Learning:
“Using a set of observations to uncover an underlying process”Rephrased mathematically, the Goal of Learning is:
Use the Data to find a hypothesis \(g \in \mathcal{H}\), from the hypothesis set \(\mathcal{H}=\{h\}\), that approximates \(f\) well. - When to do Learning:
When:- A pattern Exists
- We cannot pin the pattern down mathematically
- We have Data
- Components of the Problem (Learning):
- Input: \(\vec{x}\)
- Output: \(y\)
- Data: \({(\vec{x}_ 1, y_ 1), (\vec{x}_ 2, y_ 2), ..., (\vec{x}_ N, y_ N)}\)
- Target Function: \(f : \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{Y}\) (Unknown/Unobserved)
- Hypothesis: \(g : \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{Y}\)
Learned from the Data, with the hope that it approximates \(f\) well.
- Components of the Solution:
- The Learning Model:
- The Hypothesis Set: \(\mathcal{H}=\{h\}, g \in \mathcal{H}\)
E.g. Perceptron, SVM, FNNs, etc. - The Learning Algorithm: picks \(g \approx f\) from a hypothesis set \(\mathcal{H}\)
E.g. Backprop, Quadratic Programming, etc.
- The Hypothesis Set: \(\mathcal{H}=\{h\}, g \in \mathcal{H}\)
- The Learning Model:
-
The Learning Diagram:
- Types of Learning:
- Supervised Learning: the task of learning a function that maps an input to an output based on example input-output pairs.
- Unsupervised Learning: the task of making inferences, by learning a better representation, from some datapoints that do not have any labels associated with them.
Unsupervised Learning is another name for Hebbian Learning
- Reinforcement Leaning: the task of learning how software agents ought to take actions in an environment so as to maximize some notion of cumulative reward.
- Supervised Learning: the task of learning a function that maps an input to an output based on example input-output pairs.


MANOS, THE HANDS OF FATE
Review by John Beachem
*
Directed by: Hal Warren Written by: Hal Warren
I'm going to keep this plot summary brief, something I wish Mr. Warren had done with his "film" (I know, "Manos" only runs 74 minutes, but that's not brief enough). Michael (Hal Warren) leads his family on a trip out into the middle of nowhere. After being lost for a great deal of time, they stumble across a lodge run by Torgo (the late John Reynolds), a small man with large knees. Torgo informs the family that he watches the house while the master (Tom Neyman) is away. Michael insists on Torgo allowing his family to stay, despite the fact that Michael's wife, Margaret (the late Diane Mahree), and daughter, Debbie (Stephanie Nielson), aren't too keen on staying. Torgo relents and slowly carries the family's luggage into the house. Meanwhile, the master awakens, and his wives (Jackey Neyman, Sherry Proctor, Robin Redd) vie for his favor by wrestling in the mud.
I'm afraid I'm not an eloquent enough writer to adequately describe the experience that is "Manos, the Hands of Fate". I don't believe I can do justice to this diamond in the rough; this magnificent piece of filmmaking that is - oh forget it, I can't even say it. "Manos, the Hands of Fate" is, arguably, the worst movie of all time. Imagine, if you will, the following: Hal Warren, a fertilizer salesman, bets a friend that he can make a popular horror film on a minimal budget. He hires several actors who have little to no experience or training (he himself has no experience or training), and leads the cast through a script which consists of long spells of nothingness occurring. You're no doubt wondering why I have referred to cast members as "the late"; it's because after the film was finished, and the cast laughed out of the theater at its premier, three (that's right, three) cast members committed suicide. "Manos" (which means hands, by the way) has since become a legendary film; one which can only be watched under one of three circumstances: you're completely drunk, completely insane, or completely asleep.
While looking over the list of actors involved in this project, you'll most likely realize that none of the names sound familiar. That's because each cast member sealed his/her acting fate by appearing in this "movie". Not one actor involved went on to make any other picture. Could appearing in a bad movie really do this to one's career? It's Doubtful. For example, Barry Pepper will no doubt go on to make other films after "Battlefield Earth" (which is not to say "Battlefield Earth" is in the same league as "Manos"). The chief reason none of these actors went on to other films is because none of them could act. Hal Warren was as incompetent in front of the camera as he was behind it; Tom Neyman made Van Damme look like an Oscar winner; and Diane Mahree's part consisted of, well, nothing really. The only two actors worth noting are John Reynolds and Stephanie Nielson. Stephanie Nielson may have been only a child, but she outdid every adult in the film (she's no doubt in a mental institute somewhere after experiencing this movie). John Reynolds, who was sadly one of the three casualties of this war, actually showed some small trace of talent. Do I mean he was good? Not in the slightest. Yet, I think if he'd received some schooling and experience he might have gone on to a small career.
So what does a movie look like when there's no budget? Well, picture "The Blair Witch Project" without the scares (oh wait, there were no scares in "Blair Witch"), the extras, the scenery, or the nice cameras. You see, "Manos, the Hands of Fate" was filmed with such a cheap, ancient camera that the film could only be shot in thirty two second bursts. This means there are fades and/or cuts every thirty two seconds for no reason. The costuming in "Manos" is rather interesting. There are really only three different bits of costuming: the wives' undergarments, which they wear while fighting each other; the master's cloak of hands, which is a large cloak covered in large hands (something involving the god Manos, whom he serves); and Torgo's knees. Torgo's knees, by the way, may look like nothing more than large anomalies stuck to his legs, but they're actually an ingenious invention thought up by John Reynolds. Torgo is actually supposed to be a satyr, and the large knees were supposed to represent goat legs. I'm not quite sure how Reynolds thought this up, and I'm not sure how we were supposed to know they were goat legs, and I'm not even sure why Torgo is supposed to be a Satyr, but there you have it.
There are two more things worth noting in "Manos". One is the dialogue, particularly that of Torgo; the other is the soundtrack. Torgo's dialogue generally consists of repeating the same phrases over and over again. For example, when asked about the master's health, Torgo states: "Dead? No, madam. Not dead the way you know it. He is with us always. Not dead the way you know it. He is with us always." I think Warren wanted to emphasize the fact that he wasn't dead like we know it, but I could be wrong. Torgo also states, in a line vaguely (very vaguely) reminiscent of a classic line from Rosalie Crutchley in "The Haunting": "There is no way out of here. It'll be dark soon. There is no way out of here." It should be noted that the camera used was so ancient and decrepit that it could not record sound. Therefore, all the characters voices were dubbed by four different people: Hal Warren, Hal's wife, and two friends. The soundtrack to "Manos" is certainly one of the high-points. After some strange and out of place lounge music in the film's opening (which consists of a lot of driving) we settle into the Torgo theme, which is made up of six notes played over and over again till you're certain your ears will begin to bleed. If I haven't made this film sound bad enough, and you are unfortunate enough to go and witness it, I do apologize. I'd recommend "Manos, the Hands of Fate" to those who simply adore classic bad movies (because this one ranks amongst the worst) and award it a full one out of five stars.
Comments? Send to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Past reviews can be found at: http://www.epinions.com/user-elerad?public=yes or http://us.imdb.com/ReviewsBy?John+Beachem
* * * * * - One of the best movies of the year. * * * * - Great flick, try and catch this one. * * * - Okay movie, hits and misses. * * - Pretty bad, see it at your own risk. * - See this one only if you enjoy pain.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews


|
WebWork 2 : Webwork reference to OGNL access
This page last changed on Nov 30, 2004 by jcarreira.
Webwork uses a standard naming context to evaluate OGNL expressions. The top level object dealing with OGNL is a map (usually referred as a context map). OGNL has a concept of a root object (in webwork terms, this is the OGNLValueStack). Along with the root, other objects are placed in the context map (referred as in the context) including your session/application/request/attr maps. These objects have nothing to do with the root, they just exist along side it in the context map. So, to access these objects, the # is used telling ognl not to look in the root object, but within the rest of the context | |-- request | |--application | context map---|--OgnlValueStack(root) | |--session | |--attr | |--parameters <ww: property value="myBean.myProperty"/> for sessions,request, and the rest that lie in the context mapActionContext.getContext().getSession().put("mySessionPropKey", mySessionObject); <ww: property value="#session.mySessionPropKey"/> or <ww: property value="#session['mySessionPropKey']"/> <ww: property value="#attr.mySessionPropKey"/> |
| Document generated by Confluence on Dec 14, 2004 16:37 |


Mr. Wells
Table of Discontents
- Our Challenge
- Our Approach
- Some Solutions
- Q&A
Our Challenge
- My Election Fear
- Managing Information
- Finding News
Our Approach
- Three Kinds of Journalists
- Anecdotal vs. Definitive
- What they say AND what they do
- Native Problems
Some Solutions
- Becoming Actual Natives
- Systems for Journalism
- Finding News in Data


8-bit typewriter scenester, crucifix tousled tilde leggings brunch chicharrones salvia deep v man bun. Master cleanse man braid disrupt banjo, deep v cray tumblr cronut. Truffaut street art everyday carry DIY. Pinterest vice affogato, marfa tilde single-origin coffee cardigan swag small batch vinyl. Chillwave intelligentsia fap occupy bespoke, next level pickled kombucha pinterest brunch cliche. Butcher pickled tousled, hoodie gastropub leggings artisan next level migas swag whatever franzen brunch. Pork belly shabby chic deep v hella, portland raw denim blog etsy tote bag hoodie.
Tilde next level lomo gluten-free 8-bit, man bun ugh. Four loko fixie plaid, disrupt vinyl mlkshk fap whatever etsy hammock. Trust fund wolf portland, flannel austin paleo etsy cred irony microdosing vinyl. Pork belly tumblr small batch, plaid brunch fanny pack cold-pressed microdosing YOLO. Fashion axe locavore chartreuse cred. Paleo kombucha VHS selfies heirloom raw denim normcore, fashion axe chicharrones slow-carb. Try-hard hoodie +1 bitters kombucha.
Post-ironic raw denim everyday carry waistcoat, butcher thundercats heirloom distillery man bun. Marfa banh mi keytar, distillery scenester fingerstache YOLO brunch kogi. Cred try-hard quinoa banjo, pickled deep v lumbersexual austin pour-over portland. Selvage photo booth hella austin kickstarter yr. Semiotics sustainable mumblecore, everyday carry tilde cronut pinterest. Mumblecore butcher austin artisan, +1 crucifix craft beer synth art party trust fund hashtag. Tousled next level portland squid whatever, offal +1 neutra skateboard.
Forage stumptown williamsburg freegan. Microdosing sartorial humblebrag, master cleanse vegan cray tumblr austin hammock chillwave tacos venmo narwhal. Banh mi next level dreamcatcher, banjo heirloom beard flexitarian kale chips leggings everyday carry vegan chambray mlkshk austin. Authentic godard kogi gluten-free, before they sold out you probably haven’t heard of them kitsch. Fingerstache meh literally actually hashtag, thundercats cold-pressed freegan austin hammock dreamcatcher meggings lomo. Roof party everyday carry gastropub cornhole. Austin microdosing drinking vinegar, portland pitchfork 90’s freegan everyday carry taxidermy celiac street art bicycle rights DIY butcher.


Accordion Box
Supporting Accessible Resources
http://heydonworks.com/practical_aria_examples/#progressive-collapsibles
http://a11y-style-guide.com/style-guide/section-navigation.html#kssref-navigation-accordion
Heydon Works Example
Factors
Box content.
Content.
Product
Box content.
Content.
A11y Style Guide Example
Accordion Heading 1
Accordion content for box 1.
Accordion Heading 2
Accordion content for box 2.
-->


Log In
Sign Up
Bridge Blog Platform
Welcome to Bridge Blog Platform, You can record your life here!
Sign Up
Already have an account?
Log in
Welcome!
Logout
Create New Blog


| | |
- confirm_prompt(question: str, yes_by_default=True) -> bool
- Shows a yes/no question.
example:
>>> reply = confirm_prompt("Are you sure?")
>>> print(reply)
args:
yes_by_default (bool) : if True just hitting return equals yes.
returns:
bool : True if ansered with yes. False if answerded with no.
- editor(text=None, default_editor='vi')
- Open an editor (environment variable EDITOR).
Allows to edit (given) text like the functionality
that happens when doing 'git commit' on the console.
args:
text (string): the text to edit
optional args:
default_editor (string) : editor to use if environment varibale
EDITOR is not set
returns:
string: the edited text
- get_resource_file(basefile, PACKAGE_NAME='einguteswerkzeug')
- gets the fully qualified name of a resource file
- show_error(msg)
- Show an error message and exit
|


 But whereas these languages are based on the application of functions to parameters, Joy is based on the composition of functions. Syntactically it looks much like Forth, and one consequence is that in Joy all formal parameters of defined functions are anonymous. However, unlike Forth, Joy also has lists which can be manipulated as data structures and, provided they are of the right kind, can be executed as programs by means of what are called combinators
The implementation described in the latter sections of this chapter is quite minimal. The implementation makes heavy use of the utilities developed in Chapter 17.
The first part of this introduction provides a theoretical motivation for the language, the second part gives a practical overview based on examples. These two parts can be read in any order; theoretically minded readers should read the first part first, practically minded readers should read the second part first.
In strongly typed languages the declaration of functions must include the types of the parameters and the type of the result. For example, in Pascal one might have the following declarations for the length of a list and the concatenation of two lists:
*
.
These type assignments to the two functions are entirely abstract,
they have nothing to do with the concrete syntax.
For example, the length of the concatenation of the two lists
[a b]
and [c d e]
could be written in any of the following ways:
@
is the explicit binary operation
of function application;
the function on its left is being applied to the parameter on its right.
For the application of concatenation the parameter is a pair.
Strictly speaking the words length
and concat
are used to denote functions as objects
--- the only function that is being used is the binary application function,
here written in infix, which takes two objects to produce a third.
Languages like this are sometimes called applicative languages
(as opposed to functional languages).
There is an analogy with set theory here:
whereas in predicate logic one uses all sorts of relations,
in set theory the only relations used are formal ones such
as membership and a few others such as inclusion which are
definable in terms of membership.
So the predicate symbols of logic are replaced by
names of set objects.
In the same way the function symbols of functional languages
can be replaced by names of function objects,
and the only function symbol needed is the
symbol for the formal application function.
It is worth pointing out that membership is actually a special
case of application --- membership always applies parameters to
a set and always yields a truth value as the third object.
This might have been a little easier to see if the notation
for membership were the other way around,
or if membership were uniformly replaced by its converse.
Sometimes functions that take two or more parameters are interpreted as taking them one at a time --- they are then said to be curried. The type assignments and the example expression now look like this:
[a b]
to any list to which
it is applied, here to [c d e]
.
The application symbol is often made left-associative,
and then the inner parentheses in the expression can be omitted.
However, the outer parentheses cannot be omitted, as in
However, length can be composed with concatenation,
and the result of composing these two functions is a function
which takes two lists as parameters and yields an integer as value.
Writing o
for composition of functions we have the type
assignment and the expression maximally and minimally parenthesised:
[a b]
it yields a function taking a list L
as a parameter
and giving as value 4 + (4 + length(L) * length(L)
.
If L
is [a b c]
, then the value is 25, as required.
There is something very satisfying about composition,
it is associative and it has the identity function as
the left and right identity element:
If id
is the identity function, then for any function F
,
However, this does not work if any but the rightmost function takes more than one parameter. Clearly, instead of concatenating two lists, then taking the length and then the square, one could equivalently take the lengths of the two lists, take the sum of those, and then the square of that.
[c d e]
,
can be supplied as a parameter to sum because that is in the
middle of the composition expression.
So it seems that there is no way to have less than the two operations
of application and composition,
and to dodge the need for parentheses.
This is all the more infuriating if we compare the notation using composition and application with ordinary Polish or prefix notation. The two expressions are simply
One possible answer is that it is just a bad question to ask about any notation. For example, one would not ask this question about the infix notations
+
do not stand for anything semantic,
it is just a way of writing terms with two parameters.
It is the term that has semantic significance,
and it has no concrete syntactic properties at all.
This applies to any concrete notation,
and hence the concatenations in prefix notation
do not mean anything either.
Another possible answer is that the concatenations in prefix notation sometimes mean composition and sometimes mean application. In any one case the meaning depends on the number of parameters which the functions denoted require, and parentheses are restored as needed. On this view, then, the prefix notation is just short for the versions given earlier:
But there is a third possible answer, and it is the one that will be pursued in the remainder of this chapter. This is the answer that in the prefix notation the concatenation of symbols always means composition of functions. This is a radical view because the functions being composed will all have to be unary functions. In particular, concatenation and addition are unary and not binary, operands such as list and numerals are not nullary but unary. On this view the prefix notation is shorthand for the composition of unary functions:
M
, M1
, M2
...
Henceforth we omit the composition symbol o
again,
and remember that concatenation of symbols denotes composition
of the unary functions denoted.
Hence we have, for all M
,
the applications
M
.
And because the applications all result in the same object,
the composed functions themselves are identical.
On this view, then, computation takes unary functions as input
and produces unary functions as output.
The mystery objects can remain mysterious
unless making them explicit clarifies matters.
For long computations it is often helpful to be able
to see the result of intermediate computations.
One starts with some input data,
applies a partial computation and inspects the result.
If all went well one applies the next computation step
to the result of the previous computation.
This continues until the whole computation is completed.
If at any time the result is not what was expected,
one modifies the last computation step.
So the data come first, then comes computation step S1
, ...
finally comes computation step SN
:
D1
and D2
that both have to be processed individually first,
then combined, and the result processed further:
One advantage of mapping composition onto concatenation
is that it becomes easy to manipulate programs as data
and then to execute them with combinators.
The simplest combinator is i
which effectively removes brackets and executes
what is inside.
For example, all of the following are equivalent to 25:
map
combinator:
The following is a tutorial on Joy.
The large number of garbage collections is due to the fact that for testing purposes the amount of memory available for user nodes was on purpose kep absurdly small.
If you did not read the theoretical first part of this introduction, then you should do that now.
This section develops the design principles of the Joy language up to a full definition.
Joy was designed to make its semantics as simple as possible.
The semantics of any language is given by a function which
assigns meanings to the basic components of the language ---
be they formulas, terms or programs.
For example, in propositional logic the semantic function
assigns a set of interpretations in which a given formula is true.
In particular, a disjunction P v Q
is true in all interpretations in which P
is true or Q
is true.
Hence to a disjunction the semantic function SEM
assigns
the union of the interpretations in which P
is true
with the set of interpretations in which Q
is true.
Similarly,
to a conjunction P & Q
the function SEM
assigns
the intersection of the set of interpretations in which
P
is true and the set of interpretations in which Q
is true.
In an arithmetic language the semantic function SEM
assigns numbers to terms,
and to X + Y
it assigns the sum of the numbers assigned to X
and Y
.
In propositional logic there are two special formulas,
say F
and T
, which are the identity elements
for conjunction and disjunction,
the function SEM
maps them onto the
identity elements for union and intersection,
the empty set of interpretations
and the universal set of interpretations.
In arithmetic there is the numeral 0
which the function SEM
maps onto the identity element for
addition, the number zero.
Binary composition of functions is an associative operation with the identity function as the left and right identity; together they form a monoid. For a very simple semantics, one now needs a binary operation on programs and a left and right identity such that the semantics preserves the operation and the identity; the semantic function which associates with every program a meaning then is a homomorphism. A suitable monoid on programs consists of the binary operation of concatenation of programs as lists together with the empty list as the left and right identity.
This section describes the core part of the language which is implemented directly. The other parts are built on top of this in the library.
Pushing Data:
Literals of type Boolean, character, integer and list
can be pushed onto the stack just by writing them.
Strictly speaking a numeral such as 123
does not denote
the number 123 but a function which takes stacks as arguments
and stacks as values;
for an arbitrary stack S1 as argument the function has as its
value another stack S2 which is like S1 except that it has
an additional item, the number 123, on top.
The two Booleans are written true
and false
.
Character literals consist of a single quote followed by the character
or by the escape character \
followed by the decimal ASCII
value of the character.
Integers are written in decimal notation with an optional preceding
unary minus.
Lists are enclosed in [
and ]
.
As a metanotation we write [X]
for the unit list
whose only element is X
,
we write []
for the empty list,
[Xs]
for a list containing zero or more members Xi
,
and [X Xs]
for the list containing one or more members Xi
,
with X
as the first element.
Symbols are just letters followed by up to 15 further
letters, digits and underscores.
Operators:
There are several operators on values of various types.
They are written in postfix notation and take their parameters
from the stack.
Parameters are counted from the top of the stack;
so the third parameter is the third item on the stack.
The three untyped operators pop
, dup
and swap
take parameters of any type.
Combinators: These are operators which expect lists on the top
of the stack; they will remove them from the stack
and execute them as programs.
The simplest is the i
combinator.
It expects a list as its only mandatory parameter
on the top of the stack, it removes this list and executes
it as a program.
Hence it satisfies:
Slightly more complicated is the dip
combinator.
It expects two mandatory parameters on the top of the stack.
The second parameter can be anything.
The first parameter, topmost,
has to be a list.
The dip
combinator removes these two parameters from the stack
and then executes the list as a program.
Typically the execution will change the stack.
After that, the dip
combinator will restore what
was its second parameter to the top of the now current stack.
So its principal use is to produce a change
in the stack without affecting the top element.
For a data value X
, the dip
combinator satisfies
Very useful is the step
combinator,
which takes two mandatory parameters.
The second parameter has to be a list of arbitrary data values.
The first parameter, topmost, has to be a list
which can be executed as a program.
The step
combinator removes the two parameters.
Then, starting with the first element, if any,
of the list of data,
it pushes that datum on the stack and then executes the other list
as a program.
This is repeated for each datum member of the second parameter.
If that list was empty, then the first parameter is not executed at all.
The step
combinator satisfies
There are two combinators for stepping through the elements
of a list:
stepl
traverses the list from left to right, and
stepr
traverses the list from right to left.
The list to be stepped through has to be the fourth parameter
on the stack.
The other three are two functions and a constant.
The third parameter has to be a function,
for each element of the list it will be applied to the stack
with that element topmost, and below that what was below the list.
This application will produce a value on top of the stack.
The second parameter is a constant.
For the first element of the list the produced value will
now be combined with the constant using the first parameter.
For any further elements of the list the produced value
will be combined with the result of the previous combination.
There are two reasons for having such a small core language: 1) to help in identifying the necessary primitives, and 2) to keep the implementation as small as possible. One consequence is that the implementation is quite inefficient.
To turn the library into a complete reference,
the meanings of the primitives
are explained in comments.
The defined concepts and the primitives
are given in their alphabetical order
because the program uses a binary search through
the identifiers defined in the library.
The program makes two passes through the library.
The SET
, IF
and PUT
directives at the beginning and end
produce messages when the library is loaded.
There are also two INCLUDE
directives.
The first included file contains a definition of a Joy interpreter
written in Joy, it is discussed later in this chapter.
The second included file contains answers to some exercises
given at the end of this chapter.
This section develops some aspects of a theory of the Joy language: an algebra for manipulating Joy programs by means of reduction rules, a rudimentary theory of Joy types, and a Joy interpreter written in Joy.
{a b ..}
which may be finite or infinite.
Strings over A are sequences of zero or more members of A.
Let a binary relation between strings be given by a set of
identities of the form S1 = T1
, S2 = T2
and so on.
Write S == T
for the smallest reflexive, symmetric and transitive
extension of this relation which
also satisfies the condition
R S U
and R T U
are concatenations having
S
and T
somewhere in the middle.
Example:
propositional logic in prefix notation,
with just the constants 0 and 1, negation -
, and conjunction &
.
Consider the rewrite relation given by
Clearly the method works not only for various styles of notation but also for various types: truth values, numbers, strings, lists and other constructions. Since there are only two truth values, it is possible to give a short list of rewriting rules for the operators. But already for numbers an infinite collection of rewriting rules is needed. This collection has to be specified in a finite way --- but this does not present an obstacle. For Joy rewriting rules are needed for all data types and for the stack operations. Here is an example:
In Joy there is no need for named parameters in definitions --- the mechanism of naming is replaced by stack operations and by combinators. This is illustrated by all the functions defined in the standard library. (Note that any variables occurring there are inside comments explaining the meaning of primitives.)
Backus (1981) argued that programming concepts should satisfy strong and clean mathematical laws. In Joy the absence of named parameters has the consequence that his requirement holds in a rather startling way. The following are some examples of laws that can be written in infix or in functional notation and with variables - in the left column, and can also be written in Joy notation without variables - in the right column.
The associativity of concatenation and its left and right identity are expressed by the first two laws below. The third law relates the b-combinator with concatenation. The associativity of functional composition is expressed by the fourth law. (Henson (1987, p 258) criticises presentations of the FP-systems originally due to Backus (1978) in that they do not give a law to this effect, although they use it in proofs.) Finally, the last law expresses that the empty program is the left and right identity of functional composition.
In this part we develop a rudimentary theory of Joy types.
As indicated in the introduction, all Joy functions are unary functions taking a complex object as their sole parameter and yield a complex object as their value. The complex objects consist of a stack, an input file and an output file. Because of this, the composition of two appropriate functions is well-defined. Furthermore, all functions are of the same type.
For many purposes this last result about types leaves out far too much. It fails to distinguish the various data types that can be manipulated on the stack and shifted between the stack and the two files. Clearly there are some important differences between the following:
B
(oolean), C
(haracter),
I
(nteger) and L
(ist).
Here are some examples:
Because Joy uses postfix notation, an elegant calculus of types can be developed for it. This calculus is adapted from what are called categorial grammars, see the end of this section for some reading. The type expressions are defined recursively as the smallest set generated under the following rules:
The theory of Joy types needs to be developed much further. It would be most useful in a Joy compiler.
Reading: The quotation type introduced here appears to be new. On the other hand, the concatenation and cancellation types in this section are adapted from categorial grammars, a generating mechanism equivalent to context free grammars. For a survey of uses of categorial grammars see the book edited by Oehrle, Bach and Wheeler (1988). In that book the chapters by Casadio and Lambek are probably most useful for the theory of Joy types.
In this section we develop a Joy interpreter written in Joy itself. This will serve several purposes: it is an exercise in developing a Joy program, it shows how well Joy can talk about itself, and it is a basis of the Joy interpreter to be written in Pascal in the next section.
The first version is merely a reminder that
Joy already has a combinator, namely the i
combinator,
which removes a program from the top of the stack
and executes it.
The next version makes explicit the fact that Joy programs are lists which are interpreted by stepping through the members of the list and executing each in turn, by considering them as unit size programs:
The next version has to spell out the various cases.
The select-operator and the i-combinator together
perform rather like a CASE
statement in Pascal.
The list of cases has to be pushed first.
So the next version takes the form:
CASELIST
consists of a list of cases c1
, c2
and so on.
Clearly, among the cases to be considered are at least
the primitives used in the interpreter so far:
1) the select
operation,
2) pushing a list or program,
and 3) two combinators,
the step
combinator and the i-combinator.
It is best to consider the select
operation first.
It has to be handled like most other operations P
:
to interpret P
which is on top of the stack,
the primitive P
has to be popped,
and then the primitive operation P
has to be executed.
This gives the following case for the select
operation:
[pop select]
.
The i
combinator executes this,
which has the consequence of pop
ping the select
operator
which is now on top of the stack.
Then the select
operation is executed, as required.
As can be seen,
the interpreter will also have to use the pop
primitive,
and therefore it will also have to implement it:
select
operation used in the interpreter
only looks at the type of something,
so the empty list can serve as the sample list:
step
and i
combinators.
It would be possible to treat them just like operators:
step
combinator is being executed,
having a program [Ps]
as a parameter,
the step
combinator should encounter a program
which will eventually call the Joy interpreter
recursively, but first push [Ps]
.
So it has to execute
step
combinator.
First,
the step
combinator is popped off.
Now [Ps]
is on top of the stack.
Second, the unit program [Joy]
is pushed.
Then the two are cons
'ed together to yield [[Ps] Joy]
.
If this is ever executed, it will push [Ps]
and then use Joy to interpret it.
It will be executed as many times as there are
elements in the list below,
and the execution is under the control of
the step
combinator.
For uniformity the same method is used for the
i
combinator, although it would be possible for it
to just call the Joy interpreter recursively.
cons
operation,
so the interpreter has to be able to handle this operation, too.
Here then is a complete but minimalist version of Joy-in-Joy:
This is not universal yet,
what is still needed are two stack operations swap
and dup
,
one list destructor uncons
,
and one combinator dip
:
The final version is actually part of the library, as an included file:
Declarations: The program makes use of the utilities from Chapter 17 almost everywhere. Therefore the utilities have to be processed by the Pascal compiler before the program proper can be processed. But the utilities are not entirely stand alone, they require several previously declared labels, constants and even two types: symbols and standard identifiers. Only after these have been declared can the file containing the utilities be included. After that file has been processed, anything in the utilities is accessible. Then follow any declarations specific to Joy: constants, types, variables, procedures and functions, and then the main program. Hence the program has this structure:
Data Structures: Apart from what is provided in the utilities, there are two main data structures: The first is a table of identifiers together with a code address. The second is an array of code nodes, consisting of an opcode, a value and a next field --- all used by the program proper, but also a Boolean flag needed for the garbage collector. There are several registers pointing into the code. One of these is the freelist of linked nodes that are known not to be in use otherwise. When the program needs a new node, it calls a procedure to provide one; normally it is taken from the freelist. If the freelist has become empty, then garbage collection occurs, and hopefully the freelist will be replenished. The garbage collector is described in detail at the end of this section.
Main: The main program begins by calling an initialisation procedure whose body consists of calls to procedures in the utilities: one call to initialise the scanner, several calls to enter the reserved symbols, and several calls to enter the standard identifiers. Then the main program initialises the freelist: all memory cells are set to unmarked, all but the last memory cells are linked to their successor, the last cell is linked to nothing, and the freelist pointer is set to the first cell.
The main program then calls a procedure to read the library. It is necessary to make two passes through the library: on the first pass the identifiers to be declared are read and entered sequentially into the table of user identifiers; since the lookup procedure will use a binary search through this table, it is essential that the identifiers to be declared are in alphabetical order. On the first pass the right hand sides of the definitions are ignored. Then the library is read a second time. Now all identifiers can be looked up, and code can be generated for the right hand side of each definition and entered in the table for the identifier being defined. When the library has been read, any remaining memory is available to the user.
The main program then sets the stack to empty and enters its principal read-execute loop. It repeatedly reads a factor into its program register and then calls the Joy interpreter to execute that program.
The interpreter:
The principal interpreting procedure joy
is modelled after the Joy interpreter written in Joy
that was described in the previous section.
It takes as a value parameters a (possibly zero)
integer pointer to a sequence of next-linked nodes.
Its body consists of a loop which steps through this sequence,
thus modelling the operation of the step
combinator
of Joy-in-Joy.
Each individual step is handled by a CASE
statement
to model what in Joy-in-Joy is the
select
operator and the i
combinator.
The CASE
statement examines the op-field of the given node
and executes the appropriate code.
For pushing values of various types,
the konS
function is used to obtain a new node from the freelist.
For that node the op-field is the type of the value,
the value-field is the integer value,
and the next-field is the old stack.
For unary operations the required value is computed
for a new node whose next-field is the next-field of the old stack.
Since there are quite a few binary operations,
a tiny special purpose procedure can be used
which pushes the required item onto the old stack
with two of its top items removed.
For the combinators the interpreter has to call itself recursively.
The case for the i
combinator pops the topmost item of the stack
and executes it.
The case for the dip
combinator is similar,
except that the second item on the stack first has to be saved
on the dump.
Because this saving requires a new node and hence may trigger off
a garbage collection,
the first item also has to be saved on the dump.
After the execution,
the second item is restored from the dump onto the stack.
The case for the step
combinator
has to use a WHILE
loop to traverse
the list which is the second item on the stack.
For each element of that list,
the element has to be pushed onto the stack
and then the first item is executed.
The final case which results in a recursive call concerns uses of the library.
For these the required code sequence is taken from the
table of user declared identifiers,
the value field of the node contains the address in that table.
Hence that table does not have to be searched at run time.
Almost all the cases in the interpreter have to access value-fields and next-fields of nodes, they have to check that the nodes really exist and that they have the appropriate operator type. This is best done by a number of checking functions local to the interpreting procedure.
Input and Output: The main program, the procedure to read the library, and also the interpreter make use of two mutually recursive procedures to read terms and factors.
The procedure for reading terms will read at least one factor,
and while the next symbol is the beginning of another factor
it will read a further one.
The code generated for this sequence of one or more factors
has to be linked correctly.
In a VAR
parameter the procedure returns
the address of the first factor it has read,
any further factors are linked to the first.
The procedure for reading factors consists essentially of a CASE
statement which dispatches on the currently seen symbol.
Number constants and character constants simply generate a new node.
Identifiers require the lookup procedure to be called to find the address,
then a new node is generated with that address as the value field.
Because the scanner handles hyphens before digits as unary minus
and otherwise as a special symbol,
the solitary hyphen cannot be handled together with other identifiers
but needs a special case.
Finally, a left bracket signals a list;
if the next symbol is the beginning of a factor,
then another term is read and made the content of that list,
otherwise the list is empty.
The procedure also uses a VAR
parameter to return the address
of the code for the factor it has read.
There are corresponding output procedures that are used by the interpreter and also in various places for listing, tracing and debugging.
The procedure for writing terms uses a WHILE
loop to write zero or more
factors by stepping along a list of next-linked nodes.
If there is a further factor,
a space separator is written, too.
The procedure for writing factors uses a CASE
statement to
dispatch on the op-field of the node.
For characters and integers it writes the values,
for Booleans it writes the appropriate identifier,
for identifiers in the library it uses the value-field
to index into the table of identifiers,
for all others it obtains the name from the table
of inbuilt standard identifiers.
For lists it writes [
and ]
surrounding
what will be written by a call to the procedure for writing terms.
Both procedures do not actually do the writing themselves but call appropriate procedures from the utilities. This way whatever has to be written will get to the standard output file and, if a listing is being written, to the listing file.
For debugging and tracing it is useful to have another output procedure which writes the record fields of a given node to the output file and potentially to the listing file.
The kons function and garbage collection:
New memory nodes are needed by the program in many places:
to read the library,
to read a Joy program,
and when interpreting a Joy program
to manipulate the stack and the dump.
Addresses of new new nodes are provided by a function kons
,
normally new nodes are taken from the freelist
of linked nodes not otherwise used.
The function is similar to procedure generate in earlier programs:
its parameters are essentially the fields of the record
that is to be created.
When the freelist is empty, garbage collection must take place.
It is necessary to mark any nodes that are pointed to
directly or indirectly by the other registers:
the program, the stack and the dump.
The marking consists of a recursive traversal of any
so far unmarked nodes and setting the mark-bit for each node visited.
Then a single sweep is made through the available memory:
any nodes that are not marked are added to the freelist.
Also, in anticipation of the next garbage collection,
all nodes are set back to unmarked.
The mark sweep method is the simplest of all garbage collectors,
it takes only about 20 lines of code as part
of the body of the kons
function.
A good way to test a garbage collector is to exercise it (almost)
to death.
In the initial development of the implementation of Joy described here
only the absurdly small number of 20 memory cells was allowed
for user programs in addition to what is needed for the library.
This made detailed tracing of memory usage feasible,
and unfortunately it was necessary.
One of the early bugs discovered this way was the need for
the garbage collector to mark not only
the program-, stack- and dump-registers,
but also the value- and next-parameters of the kons
function itself.
Otherwise the execution of swap
, cons
and uncons
can create unmarked cells.
Lookup: The only procedure that remains to be described is the procedure which looks up identifiers in the table. It is called in two places in the program: when reading factors and for the second pass of the procedure which reads the library. It first searches the table for any identifiers that might have been entered after the library has been read. Since no order can be assumed, this first search is linear, starting with the most recent entry. If the identifier was not found, a binary search is made through the sorted portion that was entered during the first pass through the library. If it is still not found, a binary search is made through the table of the inbuilt primitives. If it was not found there, it is entered as the most recent entry in the table of identifiers. This part is not yet enabled when the library is being read. The table of user introduced identifiers can only grow, it is never scavenged.
The following is the Pascal source file.
It is not quite standard,
because it uses the utilities of the previous chapter
in an included file.
If your Pascal does not allow included files,
you will have to physically include that
file at the point where the INCLUDE
directive occurs,
about half a page down.
If your Pascal compiler follows the original (too) strict definition of
the language ---
by insisting that declarations of labels, types, variables
and procedures and functions occur strictly in this order ---
then the declarations of the utilities and of the Joy program
will have to be merged.
There are no procedures as parameters,
so it should be possible to write the program
in just about any version of Pascal.
Algebra: Find Joy equations which express the De Morgan laws and the left and right distributive laws. All these laws have their duals, of course.
Self-reproducing programs: 1) Use the algebra of Joy programs to show that
[Fs]
for which
i
combinator finds a program of this kind
on the stack and then executes it,
then the execution will create that very same program on the stack.
2) Find some other programs which satisfy the same law.
3) Find programs [Gs]
and [Hs]
such that
[Is]
[Js]
[Ks]
[Ls]
[Ms]
such that
=/=
means denote different functions.
Note that [Ms]
is reproducing but not self-reproducing,
the child is not like its parent,
but the grandchild is like its grandparent.
5) Find a reproducing program such that each of
its descendants is different from each of its ancestors.
6) Find a self-reproducing program [Ns]
which is insensitive
to mutilation --- where a mutilation is either removing
the head (by rest
) or removing the body (by first
).
So it should satisfy
Constructing Joy-in-Joy: The Joy interpreter written in itself is very repetitive, the cases fall into three groups in which the members are almost alike. Write a Joy program which is shorter than the Joy-in-Joy interpreter and which constructs one.
Automatic printout:
In interactive work one frequently writes very small programs,
and in order to see what has been computed one tends to write
put
at the end of every little interactive program.
This can be a nuisance.
In Lisp this is avoided by the top-level read-eval-print loop
which always prints the last value that has been computed.
It is easy enough to add such a facility to the read-execute loop
of Joy.
But it would be better to have the automatic printing as an option.
Design a way of making automatic printout of the top item
of the stack, or even of the whole stack,
an option under user control.
OOPS: In interactive work one often makes a mistake, by accidentally deleting something from the stack that was intended to be kept for later. It would be useful be able to reset the stack to what it was before the error was made. One way to do so is to copy the stack register to an OOPS-register before executing the next program. Then, if a mistake did occur, a new OOPS-command could restore the stack to what it was.  Implement such an OOPS facility.
Pretty Printing:
The current output procedures just write to the output file
and potentially to the listing file without any formatting.
One way of improving on this is to devise
a method of indentation that makes it easier for the human reader.
A very simple method would add two columns of indentation
per list; the first [
to be written in the same line followed
by one space, then the first element (if any),
and the last element followed by a space and the closing ]
.
So, for example,
the following is a list of three lists,
of 3, 0 and 2 elements respectively:
Eliminating the dump: In the current implementation the dump serves to save elements of the stack if they may be needed again later. Describe at least two different implementation techniques of eliminating the dump. Do they offer any advantages?
Implementing the library directly: As explained earlier, this minimal implementation of the Joy language is intended to highlight the essentials, even at the expense of runtime efficiency. Most of the useful operations are actually defined in the library, and their execution requires the execution of many primitives. For example, the operation which selects the first element of a list does so by 1) unconsing the list, producing two elements, the first and the rest, then by 2) swapping these two, so that the rest is now topmost, and then by 3) popping the rest. A total of four push operations occur, when clearly just one would do. So, having first not defined in the library but built in as a primitive should speed up this common operation by a factor of about three. The same is true of just about all the operations that are defined in the library - it would be more efficient to include them as primitives.
One of the first combinators one would want to implement
directly is the ifte
combinator.
As it is currently implemented in the library,
essentially by the index-operation and the i
combinator,
it is particularly inefficient:
first, the IF
part and the THEN
part have to be swapped,
which uses two nodes.
Then they have to be paired to form a list of two elements.
The pairing requires an empty list to be pushed, another one node.
Then the two parts are cons'ed into that,
each requiring two nodes, a total of four.
Then the indexing operation pushes the appropriate part,
another node.
Only then does the i
combinator execute the appropriate part.
The total of eight wasted nodes could be eliminated entirely
by implementing the ifte
combinator directly.
Hence with four lines of easy Pascal one should be able to achieve
a speed up by a factor of eight for this combinator.
As an exercise, select some of the operators or combinators currently defined in the library and implement them as primitives. The chosen operations should then be commented out from the library. It would be possible to eliminate everything from the library, and then there would be no need for the program to read it (twice) prior to each run. However, the library would still be a useful document for the user to read, because it contains all definitions.
Sets:
Joy can be usefully augmented with other data types.
Sets could be useful, even if they do not have the same generality
as in Pascal.
As members of sets, just small numbers from 0 to, say, 31,
a maximum of 32, would be useful.
In a typical Pascal implementation
the value-field of a node can hold a 32 bit integer,
and alternatively it could be made to hold a 32 bit set instead.
There will have to be a notation for literal sets,
say for example {1 5 12}, which is similar to but different
from the notation for literal lists.
A range notation, as in say {3..5 10..20}
might be a good starting point.
As operations, just union and intersection would do
as binary operators,
and unary complementation with respect to
the universal set {0..31}.
To name these operations,
either new symbols could be introduced,
or the symbols or
, and
and not
could be made (ad hoc) polymorphic
by overloading their meaning in a type sensitive manner.
Additionally there should perhaps be transfer functions
which transform sets to lists and vice versa.
Larger sets would certainly be better, but they would occupy more space than the value-field can hold. So the value field could be made to hold a pointer to a set. But then sets have to be stored elsewhere, and separate memory management and garbage collection might have to be implemented just for that. One alternative is to implement large sets as linked lists of 32 bit sets.
Reals: Much the same kind of decision has to be made if one wants to implement real numbers. If reals are going to be used a great deal, then it is best to make the value-field large enough to hold a real. Any other values will then waste some space. If reals are only used rarely and memory is a problem, then they should be implemented in a separate area of memory with its own memory management and garbage collection.
Other memory management: The efficient use of memory in dynamic languages such as Lisp, Snobol and Prolog has been the topic of intensive research. Two broad areas of memory management are normally distinguished: garbage collection and reference counting.
Garbage collection requires a traversal of all used nodes to mark which ones are in use. The traversal can be either recursive, as it was done in the Joy implementation described above, or it can use a more sophisticated method of temporary pointer reversal to eliminate the need for the stack space in the recursion. Then in a second stage the unused nodes can be collected in a free-list; this is the mark-sweep method used here. Alternatively the used nodes can be copied to a dual area of memory from which further nodes will be taken until that is exhausted. Then this area is marked and the needed nodes are copied to the first area. This mark-copy method of garbage collection is particularly useful in virtual memory systems because it minimises fragmentation of memory.
Reference counters replace the mark-bit by an integer which keeps track of how many times a node is being referenced. When that count drops to zero, the node can be recycled. The great advantage of reference counting over garbage collection is that it works continuously. However, the method does not work with circular structures. Joy as described does not have circular structures, so reference counting is a candidate implementation method. On the other hand, one might well want to add circular structures to Joy, and then one would have to resort back to garbage collection.
Reading: For a gentle exposition to functional programming using Miranda see Bird and Wadler (1988). For an exposition using ML see Reade (1989). A more theoretical perspective can be found in Henson (1987). The literature on Lisp contains many small interpreters written in their own language. Henderson (1980) develops this interpreter into a program in a more conventional sequential language. Kamin (1990) gives Pascal implementations of small versions of many languages, including several functional languages, and of two memory management techniques: mark-copy and reference counting. Peyton Jones (1987) discusses theoretical aspects of the compiler for Miranda. For efficient implementations of functional languages, using their inherent parallelism, and for references to the extensive recent literature in that field, see Kelly (1989).
The language Joy was inspired by Quine (1971) and Backus (1981), who in quite different fields argue for the elimination of variables (of different kinds). The earliest version of Joy was a (too) large implementation in Pascal, then followed much smaller ones in Prolog, Common Lisp, and, by a group of students, in C. A large, more or less final version is described in von Thun (1997). As all functional languages, Joy would lend itself to parallel execution, even if only by software on perhaps a transputer, but so far no attempts have been made in that direction. A Joy chip is at most a remote possibility.
Joy is unlike any of the conventional functional languages. The closest I have been able to find is the (virtual) machine language of CAM, the Categorical Abstract Machine in Curien (1986) and in Cousineau, Curien and Mauny (1987). The CAM machine language is not intended for the human programmer, instead it is used as the target language for implementations of languages such as ML. For Joy the programming language and the machine language are identical.
Any further development of the Joy language should consider the very high level combinators in Meijer, Fokkinga and Paterson (1991). These can be used to define the more familiar combinators such as map and fold.
Later, in Chapter 21, we will see a compiler written in itself, in this chapter we have seen an interpreter written in itself. The literature on Lisp and Prolog contains other examples of interpreters written in their own language. The idea of writing a language processor in its own language can be carried further. What are called partial evaluators can compile interpreters into compilers; and even more mind-boggling applications are possible. For some recent references, see Jones (1990). There is no reason why a partial evaluator should not be written in Joy for Joy. Another application of language processors written in their own language gives rise to the possibility of reflection, a mode of interpretation in which a program sometimes looks at itself rather than at the data. This is an exciting new field, references can be found in the collection edited by Maes and Nardi (1988).
The projects outlined in this section go well beyond the scope of mere exercises. The first project concerns improving the efficiency of the implementation in a manner that goes deeper than the exercise suggested in the previous section. Two others deal with extending the language so that it becomes either an imperative or a relational one. The last section concerns a compiler for Joy.
Even if the entire library is eliminated in favour of primitives,
there is much room for optimisation.
Consider the if-then-else combinator branch
implemented directly in Pascal as suggested in the previous section.
It expects three items on top of the stack:
two executable programs, and below that one Boolean value
which will determine which of the two programs will be executed.
In most applications the two programs will occur literally
just before the branch
combinator.
Hence in any simple implementation the following will occur:
Some possibly complex calculation will produce the Boolean value.
Then two simple push operations will push the two programs onto the stack.
Then the branch
combinator will pop all three items,
and execute one of the two programs.
In other words,
the two programs are first pushed and then immediately popped.
But this is wasteful,
it would be better if the two programs were not pushed at all
but attached to the branch
combinator as parameters.
Then the calculation of the Boolean value will occur as before,
then this new kind of branch
combinator will inspect that value
and execute one of its parameters.
To implement this,
a special optimised version of the branch
combinator is needed.
Since the next field of any node is already needed for linkage,
only the value field is available.
It will have to be made to point to a pair of nodes,
one each for the two programs.
There are two places where special treatment is necessary:
in the compiling stage, where it is necessary to detect such
optimisable occurrences and to generate special code,
and in the interpreter, where this special code
is executed.
The compiler part would need fairly dramatic
redesign, since the code for pushing the two programs
will have to be taken back and attached to the
node for the special branch
combinator instead.
Since the code is generated not in an array but is taken
from the freelist,
any back references are not available and would have to be
added.
By contrast, adding a special case to the interpreter
to handle the optimised branch
combinator is quite trivial.
But there is a difficulty:
if a program is to be written and executed efficiently,
then two internal versions will be needed,
one for writing and one for executing.
This might seem like a draconian step,
but there are other reasons why one might consider this.
Take for example a simple program fragment [ 2 3 + ]
;
if this is to be written as a list with put,
then it will have to be stored that way;
and if it is to be evaluated with the i
combinator
or any other combinator, then
it is best if the program does constant folding
and replaces the [ 2 3 + ] i
by 5.
In other words, for maximal efficiency
one might trade the extra space required for
increased execution speed.
As a compromise,
one might consider actually changing the language:
say BRANCH [thenpart] [elsepart]
,
where BRANCH
is a binary prefix operator.
Recently there has been intensive research devoted to functional programming with infinite lists and other infinite data structures. In this style of programming one can (pretend to) compute an infinite structure and then access arbitrary parts. In reality the parts are only computed when they are needed. The method of implementation used here is called lazy evaluation. For some reading, see Henderson (1980, Chapter 8), Bird and Wadler (1988, Chapters 6 and 7), and Reade (1989, Chapter 8). To implement infinite structures and lazy evaluation would require considerable redesign of the Pascal program. However, it may be possible to write an inefficient version of it in Joy itself.
The most dramatic increase in efficiency would be obtained by compiling Joy into some efficient language. But for full Joy the interpreter would still be needed for handling programs such as
get
.
So a compiler will only be able to speed up programs
that are known at compile time ---
and for many purposes that would be sufficient.
The difference between purely functional languages and sequential or imperative or procedural languages is this: In functional languages there is no internal state which can be changed, there is no notion of change at all, programs simply evaluate expressions. In the other languages there is an internal state --- typically a collection of variables whose values can be changed by assignments.
There is no computational reason why Joy should not be given assignable variables. These may but need not be declared to be of any particular type, indeed, since Joy as it stands is so weakly typed it is probably best not to introduce types for variables. In Joy it is possible to manipulate lists of symbols, for example one can write
London
does not result in a push operation,
any symbols not defined in the library are just noops,
denoting the identity function.
But this could be changed easily,
so that it does produce a push.
On the other hand, if one were to think
of symbols standing for assignable variables,
then one might want the value of that variable
to be pushed instead.
The syntax for the assignment statement will have to distinguish the assignment position from the retrieving position. For example, the following could be taken to have the same meaning in Pascal and in extended Joy:
Assign
would be a unary prefix operator which takes
a variable as a parameter.
Note the difference between
assign
which takes a value, computed by +
,
and (a unit list of) a variable from the stack,
and Assign
which takes a value from the stack
and supplies its own variable.
The first is more flexible,
since the [a]
might have been computed;
but it is quite unclear whether such flexibility is desirable.
There is another way of introducing assignment
and hence change, it has been part of Lisp
since its inception.
To understand it one has to distinguish
between the variable, which is the name
of a location in memory,
and the location in memory itself.
When an assignment is being made,
what is made to change or vary is not the variable
but the memory location which it names.
So, if the locations could be referred to without naming them,
assignments need not use variables.
Suppose the stack contains at least two elements,
an arbitrary datum and a list, the list topmost.
The list is actually represented by
a memory node containing a pointer to a value
and a pointer to the next item.
The value and the next item in the list
could be changed by assignments,
for example by assigning to them
the value of the datum below the list.
In Lisp these two operations are called replaca
and replacd
;
for a good explanation of the implementation issues
see MacLennan (1983, pp 379 - 381)
and Henderson (1980, pp 116 and 175).
Joy programs denote functions taking a complex object
as parameter and yielding a complex object as value.
The objects consist of at least a stack, and at least
two files.
A quite different language would replace the functions
by relations, and to implement them one might use backtracking.
Possibly the two files would be excluded from the backtracking.
If there are assignable variables,
then two forms of assignment should be distinguished:
a normal assignment and a reversible one which is undone
on backtracking.
For such a language any program would denote
a relation between two memories which include stacks.
Many of these relations would be the familiar Joy functions,
but there could now be nondeterministic primitives:
a choice operation (OR
) and an impossible operation (FAIL
).
Nondeterministic additions to Lisp
are discussed in Henderson (1980, Chapter 7).
Another powerful addition would be the logical variables
as in Prolog.


SELF-DECLARATION PURSUANT TO ART. 46 AND 47 OF THE D.P.R. DECEMBER 28 2000 , N. 445
The undersigned ##surname## ##name## born in ##placeOfBirth## (##provinceOfBirth##) on ##dateOfBirth##, residing in ##cityLive## (##provinceLive##) ##addressLive## ##civicNumber##,
identified by ##identifiedBy## no. ##documentNumber##, phone number ##numberPhone##,
aware of the criminal consequences foreseen in case of false declarations to a public official (art 495 c.p.)
DECLARES UNDER ITS RESPONSIBILITY
- To be in transit from ##transitPlace## coming from ##fromPlace## and heading to ##toPlace##;
- To be aware of the contagion containment measures referred to in art. 1
paragraph 1, of the Decree of the President of the Council of Ministers of 9 March 2020
concerning the movement of natural persons within the whole territory
national, as well as the penalties provided for by art. 4, paragraph 1, of the Decree of
President of the Council of Ministers of 8 March 2020 in case of
non-compliance (art. 650 of the Italian Criminal Code unless the offense constitutes a more serious offense);
- That travel is determined by:
- proven working needs;
- situations of need;
- health reasons;
- return to your domicile, home or residence.
In this regard, I declare that: ##declaration##.
____________, lì ___/___/______ - ore ___:___
Signature of the declarant*: ________________
The police operator*: ___________________


At Altoro Mutual, we offer business deposit products designed to help you manage your money and grow your business including:
For more information about these products, please contact Altoro Mutual.
Note: all Altoro Mutual business deposit accounts include free access to Altoro Mutualís secure, Online Banking site, where you can view account information, make payments and transfers and more.


Boost.Range |
The use of a consistent terminology is as important for Ranges and range-based algorithms as it is for iterators and iterator-based algorithms. If a conventional set of names are adopted, we can avoid misunderstandings and write generic function prototypes that are self-documenting.
Since ranges are characterized by a specific underlying iterator type, we get a type of range for each type of iterator. Hence we can speak of the following types of ranges:
Notice that an iterator (and therefore an range) has one traversal property and one or more properties from the value access category. So in reality we will mostly talk about mixtures such as
It might, however, be reasonable to specify only one category if the other category does not matter. For example, the iterator_range can be constructed from a Forward Range. This means that we do not care about what value access properties the Range has. Similarly, a Readable Range will be one that has the lowest possible traversal property (Single Pass).
As another example, consider how we specify the interface of std::sort()
.
Algorithms are usually more cumbersome to specify the interface of since both traversal
and value access properties must be exactly defined. The iterator-based
version looks like this:
template< class RandomAccessTraversalReadableWritableIterator > void sort( RandomAccessTraversalReadableWritableIterator first, RandomAccessTraversalReadableWritableIterator last );For ranges the interface becomes
template< class RandomAccessReadableWritableRange > void sort( RandomAccessReadableWritableRange& r );
© Copyright Thorsten Ottosen 2008.
Distributed under the Boost Software License, Version 1.0. (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt or copy at www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)


Hey I am Cedric, I work for Chen Consulting and I love writing code!
Here are some of the technologies I enjoy writing day-to-day:
The easiest way to contact me is via twitter: @cedfou


|
DB Objectify
Convert DB tables to objects with models and controlers
|
Go to the source code of this file.
Variables | |
| $config ['dbobj_model_dir'] = '<path to ci models directory>' | |
| $config ['dbobj_controller_dir'] = '<path to ci controllers directory>' | |
| $config ['dbobj_dbobject_prefix'] = 'DBO_' | |
| $config ['dbobj_model_prefix'] = 'T_' | |
| $config ['dbobj_create_valiation_rules'] = false | |
| $config ['dbobj_author'] = 'Devorama' | |
| $config ['dbobj_copyright'] = 'Devorama' | |
| $config ['dbobj_license'] = 'MIT' | |
| $config ['dbobj_link'] = 'https://github.com/devorama/dbobjectify' | |
| $config ['dbobj_date_in_file'] = true | |
| $config ['dbobj_link_prefix'] = 'Lnk_' | |
| $config ['dbobj_link_tables'] = array() | |
| $config[ 'dbobj_model_dir'] = '<path to ci models directory>' |
Path to the models directory in CI
Definition at line 24 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_controller_dir'] = '<path to ci controllers directory>' |
Path to the controllers directory in CI
Definition at line 27 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_dbobject_prefix'] = 'DBO_' |
prefixed used for all DB Object classes created per table
Definition at line 30 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_model_prefix'] = 'T_' |
prefixed used for all Model classes created per table
Definition at line 33 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_create_valiation_rules'] = false |
If true then validation rules for all fields in table is created in Model
Definition at line 36 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_author'] = 'Devorama' |
File info related config. Used for each class file created
Definition at line 39 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_copyright'] = 'Devorama' |
Definition at line 40 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_license'] = 'MIT' |
Definition at line 41 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_link'] = 'https://github.com/devorama/dbobjectify' |
Definition at line 42 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_date_in_file'] = true |
Definition at line 43 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_link_prefix'] = 'Lnk_' |
Linking tables
Linking tables will try and create a class of a combination of models based on master child relationship. Child objects will always be created as a array with the key being the database value of the relationship setup. This automatically eliminates duplicate child entries to the master
The is a 2 level array. The first level will hold the master table and his primary key. The second all child tables and there foreign keys and master table related fields
for example:
array( 'flowers' => array( 'key' => 'ipkFlowerID', 'children' => array( 'flower_color_lnk' => array( 'child_key' => 'ipkLinkID', 'child_field' => 'ifkFlowerID', 'master_field' => 'ipkFlowerID', 'children' => array( 'colors' => array( 'child_key' => 'ipkColorID', 'child_field' => 'ipkColorID', 'master_field' => 'ifkColorID' ) ) ),
'smells' => array( 'child_key' => 'ipkSmellID', 'child_field' => 'ipkSmellID', 'master_field' => 'ifkSmellID' )
) )
);
Definition at line 84 of file dbobjectify.php.
| $config[ 'dbobj_link_tables'] = array() |
Definition at line 85 of file dbobjectify.php.


55 F. Hyperblocks A scalar is anything other than a list. The name comes from mathematics, where it means a magnitude without direction, as opposed to a vector, which points toward somewhere. A scalar function is one whose domain and range are scalars, so all the arithmetic operations are scalar functions, but so are the text ones such as leer and the Boolean ones such as not. The major new feature in Snap ! 6.0 is that the domain and range of most scalar function blocks is extended to multi-dimensional lists, with the underlying scalar function applied termwise: Mathematicians, note in the last example above that the result is just a termwise application of the underlying function (7×3, 8×5, etc.), not matrix multiplication. See Appendix B for that. For a dyadic (two-input) function, if the lengths don’t agree, the length of the result (in each dimension) is the length of the shorter input: However, if the number of dimensions differs in the two inputs, then the number of dimensions in the result agrees with the higher-dimensional input; the lower-dimensional one is used repeatedly in the missing dimension(s): (7×6. 8×10, 1×20, 40×6, 20×10, etc.). In particular, a scalar input is paired with every scalar in the other input: One important motivation for this feature is how it simpliﬁes and speeds up media computation, as in this shifting of the Alonzo costume to be bluer:


CrimPapers
Articles published on 9 December 2017
On 9 December 2017, 8 new articles were published in 6 journals.
Determinants of Child Maltreatment in Nepal: Results From the 2014 Nepal Multiple Indicator Cluster Survey (the 2014 Nmics)
Making Peace in Seas of Crime: Crimilegal Order and Armed Conflict Termination in Colombia
Empirical Evidence of Convenience Theory: Reports of Investigations By Fraud Examiners by Petter Gottschalk
A Thematic Analysis of Spectator Violence At Sporting Events in North America by Steven Block, Eric Lesneskie
Gender, Status, and Tax Offenses by Bruce Reese, Mary K. McDougal
“What Does It Matter How We Define It?”: Exploring Definitions of Dmst Among Service Providers and Victims/survivors by Jennifer E. O’brien
Legal Socialization and Self-Reported Criminal Offending: the Role of Procedural Justice and Legal Orientations
Mexican Cartel Negotiative Interactions With the State


I only have 30 minutes till midnight to make some commits to this project otherwise I'll have an empty spot on my activity chart.
This chapter is very short, and its about lists, so lets get started!
Ordered lists
The ordered list is created with the ol tag. Lets make a list of things that I have to do tomorrow.
- Wake up, realize how fortunate I am to be living in a country that gives me opportunities like this
- Try to take into account the things I've taken for granted, that other people in less fortunate situations can only imagine having
- Accept that on an individual level, its my responsibility to make the most of what I have, because not everyone has been as fortunate as I have been
- Put myself atleast a little bit outside of my comfort zone, today, tomorrow, and every day if its possible
- Remember that I only have a limited amount of my time in life with my family and friends. Make some room between all the things that I do so that I can spend time with them
- Evaluate whether I have been goal driven recently, and whether my goals need to be realigned.
- Last but not least. Learn from any mistakes that I have made recently
Well, that was more of an introspective journal entry than an actual list of things to do, and its not even complete, but i'm running out of time so maybe we'll hit that in the next type of list, the unordered list
An unordered list of ingredients. Try to guess what the ingredients make
- 2 cups all purpose flour
- 1/2 teaspoon baking soda
- 1/2 teaspoon salt
- 3/4 cup unsalted butter, melted
- 1 egg
- 2 cups chocolate chips
- 1 teaspoon vanilla extract
- 1/2 cup sugar
A quick note
Browsers indent lists by default so keep that in mind. By the way the ingredients are for cookies
Definition lists
The definition list is created with the dl element and usually consists of a series of terms and definition. The list contains dt and dd elements. dt elements contain the term being defined, and the dd elements contain the term being defined. It is possible to have more than one term per definition.
- Sashimi
- Sliced raw fish, a type of sushi
- Scale
- A device used to meausre the weight of an ingredient
- Procrastinate
- To put off what you can easily do now, for tomorrow.
And finally, the last type of list: The Nested List
It is possible to put lists inside of lists. Nested elements are typically just indented further than the parent list item.
- Mousse
- Pastries
- Croissant
- Palmier
- Baguette
- Tarts
Chapter 3 is now officially finished! We are currently on page 68/490, for those that are curious about my progress.


Overview
Energy Storage Workshop
The fourth workshop in the series will be on energy storage - check back here soon for more information including resources and extra information on the subject.
Homework
Check back for more info soon!
More Info
Check back for more info soon!


{% extends 'base/content_base.html' %} {% load staticfiles %} {% load crispy_forms_tags %} {% load i18n %} {% load account socialaccount %} {% block head_title %}{% trans "Sign In" %}{% endblock %} {% block content %}
{% blocktrans with site.name as site_name %}Please sign in with one of your existing third party accounts. Or, sign up for a {{ site_name }} account and sign in below:{% endblocktrans %}
{% include "socialaccount/snippets/login_extra.html" %} {% else %}{% blocktrans %} Don't Have an Account? sign up {% endblocktrans %}
{% endif %}


Pampers Expressions Light Beer Website
Main Navigation
Home
History
Products
Buy Beer
Contact Us
contact Us Page Banner
ADJECTIVE
FPO PHOTO
Contact Information
FPO PHOTO
Form
Inputs
SUBMIT
Social Media Section
Twitter
Facebook
Instagram
SUBSCRIBE FOR UPDATES
Subscribe
Social Media Section
Facebook
Instagram
SUBSCRIBE FOR UPDATES


The browser you are using is not compatible with the library. Please upgrade it to the latest version or try another one.
Powered by Antheia Frontend.


{% extends "base.html" %} {#Head container#} {% load staticfiles %} {% load bootstrap %} {% load i18n widget_tweaks %} {% block content %}
Enter your query sequence, in FASTA format (or upload a file below):
Enter the genus you want to search. If you want to search all sequences, leave this blank.
Enter your genus of interest: {{ form.genus }}
Return all sequences except for selected genus: {{ form.everything_but }}
Search the following SeqIDs: