Tag: individual

How to select multiple individual cells on Google Sheets on my Android mobile phone?

I use this feature all the time…

Having opened your sheet on Android, simply tap the cell you wish to access

enter image description hereand at the bottom of the screen you will see the place where you can Enter text or formula. Once done, tap the tick ✓ (right of screen at the end of the entry panel)

enter image description here

and then tap the tick ✓ at the top left hand side of the screen and the job is done.

enter image description here

You can only enter data in one cell at at time but if you are wishing to select a number of cells (for example to edit colours, formatting cell ranges etc), use the corners of the cell selected and drag to open a range (but you cannot enter data that way nor can you, for that matter, in a browser. Neither can you you cannot select multiple unconnected cells.

functional programming – Doesn’t “Always test through the public interface” contradict testing of individual composed functions?

I’m currently reading “Composing Software” by Eric Elliott, which is about functional programming in JavaScript. He states that if you compose multiple functions together, and that these functions have been fully tested in isolation – then you don’t need to unit test the composed function (as that can be done using an integrated test that performs all the side effects.)

But isn’t simply testing the individual functions violating the core TDD principle of “always test the public inteface, and not the implementation”? Arguably the composing of the smaller functions is an implementation detail. As long as my service performs the action that it says it will do, we shouldn’t really care about the small “private” functions being composed in order to get the right behaviour.

I’m trying to reconcile the two ideas but I’m struggling. The only way around this (that I can think of) is to mock the dependencies that my service needs so that it can be tested through the public interface, but going functional was my attempt to stop using mocks in the first place.

certificates – CA cert with many Subject Alternative Name (SAN) entries, versus individual certs in public production?

The idea of using SANs makes sense if you have, for example, one web server which takes care of several smaller websites (e.g. example.com and internal.example.com). In this case, having one certificate per web server, with SANs for each website reduces the amount of configuration overhead.

However, once you start to create what I like to call a “megacertificate”, meaning once certificate with uncountably many SANs, you will run into problems. This certificate, and its associated private key, will likely be distributed to many many different servers, meaning that your private key will be in many different places.

This in turn means that the attack surface has now grown exponentially, as it means one compromised server can now compromise all domains, even if they are on different physical servers.

(+) its easier to standardise the certificate options (i.e. hashing/cyphers) on a shared cert

This is false. First of all, the certificate itself does not define any cryptographic ciphers to be used by TLS, only which cryptographic operations are necessary to validate the certificate.

This means that two different physical servers – let’s call them alice.com and bob.com – can use the same certificate (with SAN entries for both), and yet still support completely different sets of ciphers. alice.com could support only state-of-the-art ciphers and bob.com may be stuck using insecure legacy ciphers for interoperability reasons.

The only valid reason I can think of at the moment why you might use SANs – aside from convenience during manual setup – is that an appliance or application may not support uploading several different certificates, yet needs to serve different domains.

graph – Zabbix 5 lack of individual charts.php page – how to restore?

As I can see Zabbix 5.x have no charts.php page so no way to get individual graph displayed without loading all graphs for the host.

I tried to copy charts.php from 4.4.10 to 5.0 – no luck, it won’t work and says “Class not found for action charts.php”.

May there be any way of porting this functionality to Zabbix 5.x?

performance – Disable remote http access for individual plugins in WordPress

I am creating a WordPress LMS website and to achieve my goals I need to install more than 40 plugins.

Some of the plugins send remote http requests for license check and it consumes a lot of resources and some time a cURL 28: timeout error occurs.

To disable remote http access for the whole WordPress system I can use the following code:
define( 'WP_HTTP_BLOCK_EXTERNAL', false );

Although this method works but messes up other plugins loading necessary CSS or JavaScript remotely.

Is there any way to disable remote http access for individual plugins or not and if there is please explain.

Thank you so much.

linux – Routing traffic by individual port. With Wireguard in place

In my environment all traffic is being routed out the wireguard interface – wg0.
We need to allow 1 port’s traffic to NOT go out the wireguard interface, and instead go out the systems main one.
I’d like to have port 443 NOT go out via wireguard but I don’t know/understand ip rules enough.

OS = Ubuntu 20.04
This is all on the “client” end of wireguard.

Could someone show me the rule I need to add to my wg0.conf?

wg-quick is doing the following
UP
[#] ip link add wg0 type wireguard
[#] wg setconf wg0 /dev/fd/63
[#] ip -4 address add redactied/24 dev wg0
[#] ip link set mtu 1420 up dev wg0
[#] resolvconf -a wg0 -m 0 -x
[#] wg set wg0 fwmark 51820
[#] ip -4 route add 0.0.0.0/0 dev wg0 table 51820
[#] ip -4 rule add not fwmark 51820 table 51820
[#] ip -4 rule add table main suppress_prefixlength 0
[#] sysctl -q net.ipv4.conf.all.src_valid_mark=1
[#] iptables-restore -n

testing – If two individual branches pass unit tests, once they’re merged, is the result also guaranteed to pass unit tests?

Suppose we have two branches A and B which have been forked from master.

Both branches A and B make some changes and implement some unit tests. They pass all current and new tests, then are merged back into master. For simplicity, there are no merge conflicts.

Is it guaranteed that the resulting code on master will also pass the unit tests?

unity – How can I assign a layer to tiles on an individual level?

I’ve just started out with my first game in Unity. It’s a simple 2D Platformer with a tile-based level.

enter image description here

When coding in the movement, I used the Physics2D.OverlapCircle() and an empty to check whether my player was touching the ground. However, I need to use a layer to make sure only the ground is detected.

my code below

//fixed update used for physics calculations
void FixedUpdate()
{
    //right or left arrows being pressed
    float moveX = Input.GetAxis("Horizontal");

    Vector2 moveDir = new Vector2(moveX * playerSpeed, rb.velocity.y);
    rb.velocity = moveDir;
}
 
//update used for spacebar input and force
void Update()
{
    if (Input.GetKeyDown(KeyCode.Space)) 
    {
        rb.velocity = Vector2.up * jumpForce*Time.deltaTime;
    }
    
    //is my circle overlapping any other colliders
    Collider2D collider =  Physics2D.OverlapCircle(feet.position, checkRadius, groundLayer);
    Debug.Log(collider); 
}

When I tried assigning layers to my tiles, I couldn’t find a way to do it.

I would be really grateful if anyone could show me how to, or if anyone can tell me a more efficient way to deal with jumping in a 2D platformer.