string manipulation – P=QRS decomposition of given list -2 -unordered list

This is an extended version of my previous post, \$P=QRS\$ decomposition of given list

Based on the answer and comment of @Bill,

Form all permutations of P. Form Q as the first element of each of those, R as the second element and S all the rest of each perm. Then do this with R of length 2. And then of length 3. And … until you are down to S of length 1. Now start over with Q of length 2, etc, etc, etc.

for length $$3$$, I have done this via

``````A3 = Permutations({a1, a2, a3})
For(i = 1, i <= Length(A3), i++,
P(i) = Partition(A3((i)), 1));

For(i = 1, i <= Length(A3), i++,
Q(i) = P(i)((1));
R(i) = P(i)((2));
S(i) = P(i)((3)); );
Table(Flatten({Q(i), R(i), S(i)}), {i, 1, Length(A3)})
``````

It looks okay, but I am having trouble with length 4. With the same instruction I did

``````A4 = Permutations({a1, a2, a3, a4})
Length(A4)
For(i = 1, i <= Length(A4), i++,
P(i) = Partition(A4((i)), 1)
);

(*2+1+1*)
For(i = 1, i <= Length(A4), i++,
Q1(i) = Flatten({P(i)((1)), P(i)((2))});
R1(i) = P(i)((3));
S1(i) = P(i)((4));
)
(*1+2+1*)
For(i = 1, i <= Length(A4), i++,
Q2(i) = P(i)((1));
R2(i) = Flatten({P(i)((2)), P(i)((3))});
S2(i) = P(i)((4));
)
(*1+1+2*)
For(i = 1, i <= Length(A4), i++,
Q3(i) = P(i)((1));
R3(i) = P(i)((2));
S3(i) = Flatten({P(i)((3)), P(i)((4))});
)
``````

But here the size does not agree with what I expected; For length $$4$$ case there is three choices to divide, $$(1,1,2), (1,2,1),(2,1,1)$$ and by symmetry, for each of them there are $$12$$ of them so the total is $$36$$. But here individuals have $$24$$ and thus $$24times 3=72$$.

For example, $${1,2,3,4}$$ with $$(1,1,2)$$ decomposition, we have $$(1,2,34),(1,3,24),(1,4,23), (2,1,34),(2,3,14),(2,4,13),(3,1,24),(3,2,14),(3,4,12),(4,1,23),(4,2,13),(4,3,12)$$ 12 cases (One can think of this first by chossing $$2$$ elements among $$4$$ and multiplying the degeneracy $$2$$)

For $$P=QR$$ decomposition of an unordered set, the subset is enough for whole possible cases, but in this case, after dividing into $$P=QR$$ and $$R=R’S$$, the total size should be increased, and there are some problems for injecting more possible lists into the first partitions.

Before this setup, I just plugging all the possible cases of length $$4$$ individually, but I realized this is very inefficient and even produces typos(human error) for length $$5$$ and more than length $$5$$ cases.

Besides permutations, I tried to formulate similar things with partitions command but I realized the assign function of partition only produces partitions up to its length, not partition into three pieces or more than three. i.e., as a manual says

`````` Partition({a, b, c, d, e, f}, 3, 1)
``````

produces sequences of length 3 with offset 1…

Any ideas or explicit examples are welcome!

design – Unordered command arguments in help menu

I noticed that many popular tools, e.g., git, bash commands, do not arrange the command arguments in alphabetical order in their manuals or help menus.

For example:

``````\$ git blame -h
usage: git blame (<options>) (<rev-opts>) (<rev>) (--) <file>

<rev-opts> are documented in git-rev-list(1)

--incremental         show blame entries as we find them, incrementally
-b                    do not show object names of boundary commits (Default: off)
--root                do not treat root commits as boundaries (Default: off)
--show-stats          show work cost statistics
--progress            force progress reporting
--score-debug         show output score for blame entries
-f, --show-name       show original filename (Default: auto)
-n, --show-number     show original linenumber (Default: off)
-p, --porcelain       show in a format designed for machine consumption
--line-porcelain      show porcelain format with per-line commit information
-c                    use the same output mode as git-annotate (Default: off)
-t                    show raw timestamp (Default: off)
-l                    show long commit SHA1 (Default: off)
-s                    suppress author name and timestamp (Default: off)
-e, --show-email      show author email instead of name (Default: off)
-w                    ignore whitespace differences
--ignore-rev <rev>    ignore <rev> when blaming
--ignore-revs-file <file>
ignore revisions from <file>
--color-lines         color redundant metadata from previous line differently
--color-by-age        color lines by age
--minimal             spend extra cycles to find better match
-S <file>             use revisions from <file> instead of calling git-rev-list
--contents <file>     use <file>'s contents as the final image
-C(<score>)           find line copies within and across files
-M(<score>)           find line movements within and across files
-L <range>            process only line range <start>,<end> or function :<funcname>
--abbrev(=<n>)        use <n> digits to display object names
``````

Why is that so? Won’t it improve readability and search if the arguments were sorted? Is it an issue of back words compatibility with previous releases? Or lack of resources, as a result very low task priority?

python – Inheritance vs composition: How would you implement an “unordered list”? Subclass of list, or composition?

This came up at work and left me thinking about the best way to model this:

In Python, we have the built-in `list` container, which is a mutable sequence. Equality between two lists is defined as equality of all items in the list, in their respective positions.

Now a colleague felt the need to define a type that’s a `list` for all practical purposes, except that two lists should be considered equal if they contain the same elements, in the same quantities, but in arbitrary order. Basically,

``````unordered_list_1 = UnorderedList((1,2,3))
unordered_list_2 = UnorderedList((3,2,1))

unordered_list_1 == unordered_list_2 # True!
``````

The colleague solved this by inheriting from `list` and overriding the `__eq__` special method:

``````class UnorderedList(list):
def __eq__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, UnorderedList):
return ordered(self) == ordered(other)
else:
return NotImplemented
``````

In this form it runs into a gotcha, because the builtin python types such as `list` take some shortcuts with their special methods; the not-equal `__ne__` special method does not just fall back onto the `__eq__` special method, so you get the funny scenario where two of these unordered lists can both be equal and not equal.

I suggested inheriting from `UserList` instead, which is meant to be subclassed, or maybe from one of the `collections.abc` abstract base classes. Another colleague chimed in with the familiar “Favor composition over inheritance” advice.

I feel that composition in this case would lead to a lot of boilerplate delegation code:

``````class UnorderedListUsingDelegation:
def __init__(self):
self._list = list()

def __eq__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, UnorderedListUsingDelegation):
return ordered(self._list) == ordered(self.other._list)
else:
return NotImplemented

def append(self, item):
self._list.append(item)

# Basically def every method implemented by class list and write delegation code for it:
# pop, push, extend, __getitem__, __setitem__ and so on
``````

So from that consideration, I feel like inheritance is exactly right here: A teeny tiny specialization of behavior.

But on the other hand: Is the `UnorderedList` actually substitutable for the `list` class? Not so sure here. If you do “normal” list operations, then you shouldn’t notice whether you are using an instance of the `list` class or of the `UnorderedList` class. Inserting and retrieving of elements works just fine. On the other hand, you might get unexpected behavior when comparing lists:

``````list1 = UnorderedList()
list2 = UnorderedList()

list1.append(1)
list2.append(3)

list1 == list2 # False

list1.append(2)
list2.append(2)

list1 == list2 # False

list1.append(3)
list2.append(3)

list1 == list2 # True!
``````

I guess what I’m after is some clarity on how broadly or narrowly the Liskov substitution principle should be applied. Or maybe the solution is something altogether different. Maybe we shouldn’t put such a “hack” into the `__eq__` special method and rather be explicit about what we’re doing, by writing a function like

``````def sorted_equal(a, b):
return sorted(a) == sorted(b)
``````

I assume the colleague is working with some framework that expects to be working with `list` objects but wants to inject this special way of comparing lists.

java – Given an unordered symbol table(array based) Is there an advantage to using a contains method that returns the index?

I am working on an assignment and was curious about a potential real world application. Would it be more efficient to use a contains method that returns the index of the key or -1 if not found. This I imagine would allow the programmer the ability to save double calls to get and contains within a method. Both methods have O(n) time complexity worst case. Is there a reason not to do it? The only reason why I could imagine not doing so is because it could confuse the client.

performance – Wrote My own data structure. Mixture of a doubly linked list & unordered map C++

I decided to make my own data structure. I did this because I wanted a data structure that is a queue but has o(1) time on lookup.

``````    template <class Object>
class ObjectQueue;
template <class Object>
class ObjectQueueNode: private NonCopyable
{
friend class ObjectQueue<Object>;
public:
ObjectQueueNode(const glm::ivec3& position)
: position(position),
previous(nullptr),
next(nullptr)
{}
ObjectQueueNode(ObjectQueueNode&& orig) noexcept
: position(orig.position),
previous(orig.previous),
next(orig.next)
{
orig.previous = nullptr;
orig.next = nullptr;
}
ObjectQueueNode& operator=(ObjectQueueNode&& orig) noexcept
{
position = orig.position;
previous = orig.previous;
next = orig.next;

orig.previous = nullptr;
orig.next = nullptr;

return *this;
}

const glm::ivec3& getPosition() const
{
return position;
}

private:
glm::ivec3 position;
Object* previous;
Object* next;
};

struct PositionNode : public ObjectQueueNode<PositionNode>
{
PositionNode(const glm::ivec3& position)
: ObjectQueueNode(position)
{}
};

template <class Object>
class ObjectQueue : private NonCopyable, private NonMovable
{
public:
ObjectQueue()
m_container()
{}

{
glm::ivec3 position = newObject.position;
if (m_container.empty())
{
std::forward_as_tuple(position),
std::forward_as_tuple(std::move(newObject))).first->second;

}
else if (m_container.size() == 1)
{
std::forward_as_tuple(position),
std::forward_as_tuple(std::move(newObject))).first->second;

}
else if (m_container.size() > 1)
{
std::forward_as_tuple(position),
std::forward_as_tuple(std::move(newObject))).first->second;

}
}

bool contains(const glm::ivec3& position) const
{
return m_container.find(position) != m_container.cend();
}

bool isEmpty() const
{
return m_container.empty();
}

Object* next(Object* object)
{
if (object)
{
return object->next;
}
else
{
return nullptr;
}
}

Object& front()
{

assert(iter != m_container.end());
return iter->second;
}

void pop()
{

assert(iter != m_container.end());

if (m_container.size() == 1)
{

}
else if (m_container.size() > 1)
{
}

m_container.erase(iter);
}

Object* remove(const glm::ivec3& position)
{
auto iter = m_container.find(position);
if (iter != m_container.end())
{
Object* previousObject = iter->second.previous;
Object* nextObject = iter->second.next;

//Top
if (!nextObject && previousObject)
{
previousObject->next = nullptr;
}
//Bottom
else if (!previousObject && nextObject)
{
nextObject->previous = nullptr;
}
//Inbetween
else if (previousObject && nextObject)
{
previousObject->next = nextObject;
nextObject->previous = previousObject;
}
else
{
assert(m_container.size() == 1);
}

m_container.erase(iter);
return nextObject;
}

return nullptr;
}

private:

std::unordered_map<glm::ivec3, Object> m_container;
};
``````

replacing a sup-partition (unordered list; multiset)

I am working on a bijection for integer partitions and would appreciate help with two steps.

First, I want to replace each occurrence of (4, 2, 1, 1) with (3, 3, 2). One complication is that the 4, 2, 1, and 1 need not be adjacent. For example, the input

{{4, 4, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1}, {4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 1}}

{{4, 3, 3, 2, 2, 1}, {4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 1}}

since the first partition does include (4, 2, 1, 1), even with the extra 2, and the second does not.

Second, in a later step, I need a 2 and all ones, suppose there are $$k$$ of them, to be changed to the single number $$k+2$$, e.g., input

{{5, 2, 1, 1}, {4, 3, 1, 1}, {2, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1}}

{{5, 4}, {5, 2, 2}, {4, 3, 1, 1}}.

php – How do I convert HTML headings (h2, h3, h4) to nested unordered lists or multi-dimensional arrays?

Input array with HTML headings from a WordPress post

``````\$headings = array(
'(0)' => 'Number One',

'(1)' => 'Number Two',

'(2)' => 'Number Three',

'(3)' => 'Number Four',

'(4)' => 'Number Five',

'(5)' => 'Number Six',

'(6)' => 'Number Seven',

'(7)' =>'Number Eight'
);
``````

Now I want to generate a structure in a nested unordered list.

I don't want to use a regular expression. Is there an easy way to do this with Simple HTML DOM Parser? Or a trick? It would be okay to get a multi-dimensional array as a starting point for generating the unordered list.

output

``````Number One
Number Two
Number Three

Number Four

Number Five
Number Five

Number Six

Number Seven

Number Eight

``````

Rendered HTML looks like this:

• Number one
• number two
• number three
• number five
• number five
• Number eight

php – Function to run through an unordered list of user-defined taxonomy terms

I have created a function that generates one

``` ```
my WordPress custom taxonomy terms, ad `parent > child > second child` Heritage. Functionally, it works perfectly and replaces my old hard-coded menu.

The problem is that I'm inexperienced and recognize it as an ugly, inefficient feature, but couldn't figure out how to improve it. I tried & # 39; While () & # 39; – Use loops to simplify things, but didn't get stuck. Could someone help me understand how I can improve this. The final output (including CSS and jQuery to reduce menu items that are disabled) is included below.

``````//Display Navigation Menu

function taxonomy_nav(){

//Get Parent Terms
\$getParents = (
'taxonomy'     => 'kernal_category',
'parent'        => 0,
'number'        => 0,
'hide_empty'    => false
);

//Assign parent terms to variable
\$parent_terms = get_terms( \$getParents );

//Loop through parent terms
foreach ( \$parent_terms as \$parent_term ) {

//Store children terms
\$childrenCheck = get_term_children( \$parent_term->term_id, \$parent_term->taxonomy );

//If parent term has children...
if ( ! is_wp_error( \$childrenCheck ) && ! empty ( \$childrenCheck ) ) {

//Output parent term and start new children list
echo ''. \$parent_term->name.'';
echo '';

//Loop through child items and output name
foreach ( get_terms( 'kernal_category', array( 'hide_empty' => false, 'parent' => \$parent_term->term_id ) ) as \$child_term) {

//Check if children have children
\$secondChildrenCheck = get_term_children( \$child_term->term_id, \$child_term->taxonomy );

//Generate list for second children
if ( ! is_wp_error( \$secondChildrenCheck ) && ! empty( \$secondChildrenCheck ) ) {

echo '' . \$child_term->name.'';
echo '';

//If child has child, look through child
foreach ( get_terms( 'kernal_category', array( 'hide_empty' => false, 'parent' => \$child_term->term_id ) ) as \$second_child_term) {

echo ''.\$second_child_term->name . '';

}

echo '';
echo '';

} else {

echo ''. \$child_term->name.'';

}
}

echo '';
echo '';

} else {

echo ''. \$parent_term->name.'';

}

}

``````

Functional data structure to be completed quickly and deleted in an unordered manner

I'm looking for a working data structure that would work in this role.

Adding elements to the structure is common. Removing elements from the structure happens as often as adding them, but I have no way of knowing the order in which the deletion occurs. In the long run, adding is synonymous with removal. Rarely do I need all the elements currently in the tree

I thought about using a queue, but removing it from a queue out of order is expensive.

c # – Unordered enumerators in an ObjectValue implementation

I was just about to shamelessly copy this implementation `Value Object` In one of my projects, I have just noticed that the enumerators are not being disposed of and I wonder if this could actually be a problem.

``````using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;

Namespace Microsoft.eShopOnContainers.Services.Ordering.Domain.SeedWork
{
public abstract class ValueObject
{
protected static bool EqualOperator (ValueObject left, ValueObject right)
{
if (ReferenceEquals (left, null) ^ ReferenceEquals (right, null))
{
return it incorrectly;
}

Return ReferenceEquals (left, null) || left. Equals (right);
}

protected static bool NotEqualOperator (ValueObject left, ValueObject right)
{
back! EqualOperator (left, right);
}

protected abstract IEnumerable GetAtomicValues ​​();

public override bool Equals (object obj)
{
if (obj == null || obj.GetType ()! = GetType ())
{
return it incorrectly;
}

var other = (ValueObject) obj;

// No use or disposal called?!?
var thisValues ​​= GetAtomicValues ​​(). GetEnumerator ();
var otherValues ​​= other.GetAtomicValues ​​(). GetEnumerator ();

while (thisValues.MoveNext () && otherValues.MoveNext ())
{
if (ReferenceEquals (thisValues.Current, null) ^ ReferenceEquals (otherValues.Current, null))
{
return it incorrectly;
}
if (thisValues.Current! = null &&! thisValues.Current.Equals (otherValues.Current))
{
return it incorrectly;
}
}
return! thisValues.MoveNext () &&! otherValues.MoveNext ();
}

public override int GetHashCode ()
{
return GetAtomicValues ​​()
.Select (x => x! = Zero? X.GetHashCode (): 0)
Aggregates ((x, y) => x ^ y);
}

public ValueObject GetCopy ()
{
return MemberwiseClone () as ValueObject;
}
}
}

And instead the Equal Method above should be revised as:
public override bool Equals (object obj)
{
if (obj == null || obj.GetType ()! = GetType ())
{
return it incorrectly;
}

var other = (ValueObject) obj;

using (var thisValues ​​= GetAtomicValues ​​(). GetEnumerator ())
{
using (var otherValues ​​= other.GetAtomicValues ​​(). GetEnumerator ())
{
while (thisValues.MoveNext () && otherValues.MoveNext ())
{
if (ReferenceEquals (thisValues.Current, null) ^ ReferenceEquals (otherValues.Current, null))
{
return it incorrectly;
}
if (thisValues.Current! = null &&! thisValues.Current.Equals (otherValues.Current))
{
return it incorrectly;
}
}

return! thisValues.MoveNext () &&! otherValues.MoveNext ();
}
}
}

If there is not something I do not know about Enumerator and eliminate it, I've found the defect With, To dispose () Dangerous, am I worried about nothing too much?

Author  AdminPosted on February 18, 2019Categories ArticlesTags enumerators, implementation, ObjectValue, unordered

Page 1
Page 2
Next page

Proxies-free.com: 100% Free Daily Proxy Lists Every Day!

#spu-290572 .spu-close{
font-size: 0px;
color:#666;
}
#spu-290572 .spu-close:hover{
color:#000;
}
#spu-290572 {
background-color: #000000;
background-color: rgba(0,0,0,1);
color: #333;
-moz-box-shadow:  0px 0px 10px 1px #000000;
-webkit-box-shadow:  0px 0px 10px 1px #000000;
box-shadow:  0px 0px 10px 1px #000000;
width: ;

}
#spu-bg-290572 {
opacity: 0.9;
background-color: #000;
}
/*
* Add custom CSS for this popup
* Be sure to start your rules with #spu-290572 { } and use !important when needed to override plugin rules
*/

DreamProxies - Cheapest USA Elite Private Proxies

100 Cheapest USA Private Proxies

Buy 200 Cheap USA Private Proxies

400 Best Private Proxies

Cheap 1000 USA Private Proxies

2000 USA Private Proxies

5000 Cheap USA Private Proxies

ExtraProxies.com - Buy Cheap Private Proxies

ProxiesLive.com

Proxies-free.com

New Proxy Lists Every Day

Proxies123.com