இஸ்லாமியர் உட்ப இவர்கள் அனைவருமே காளியை வழிபட்டு பலிகொடுத்தபின் கொள்ளைக்குச் செல்பவர்கள். காளிவழிபாடு இவர்களின் குற்றவுணர்ச்சியை இல்லாமலாக்கியது. ஆகவே ஈவிரக்கமில்லாத கொலைகாரர்களாக ஆனார்கள்.

The breakdown of water involves a rearrangement of the atoms in water molecules into different molecules,

Best demonstration: glue PVC inside an ABS hub or vice-versa. Cut through the two with a mitre saw and make a nice, clean cut. Look at all the voids where the plastics didn't glue together.

https://hypothes.is/search?q=tag:'0-origined+index'

TylerRick

Sure, the slow way is always "good enough" — until you learn a better way of doing things. By your logic, then, we shouldn't have the option of including "Move to" in our context menus either — because any move operation could be performed using the cut and paste operations instead? The method you proposed is 6-7 steps long, with step 4 being the most onerous when you're in a hurry: Select files "Cut" "Create New Folder" Think of a name for the new folder. Manually type in that name, without any help from the tool. (We can't even use copy and paste to copy some part of one of the file names, for example, because the clipboard buffer is already being used for the file selection.) Press Enter Press Enter again to enter the new folder (or use "Paste Into Folder") "Paste" The method that Nautilus (and apparently Mac's Finder) provides (which I and others love) is much more efficient, especially because it makes step 4 above optional by providing a default name based on the selection, coming in at 4-5 steps (would be 3 steps if we could assign a keyboard shortcut to this command like Mac apparently has ): Select files Bring up context menu (a direct shortcut key would make this even sweeter) Choose "New Folder With Selection" Either accept the default name or choose a different name (optional) Press Enter Assuming "Sort folders before files" option is unchecked, you can continue working/sorting in this outer folder, right where you left off: Can you see how this method might be preferable when you have a folder with 100s or 1000s of files you want to organize it into subfolders? Especially when there is already a common filename prefix (such as a date) that you can use to group related files together. And since Nemo kindly allows us to choose which commands to include in our context menu, those who don't use/like this workflow are free to exclude it from their menus... Having more than one way to accomplish something isn't necessarily a bad thing.

git diff-index --name-status --relative --cached @ might be a bit easier to parse (and only includes staged files so you don't have to do an extra step to filter them). Also, I couldn't use git status --porcelain because my Rails app is in a sub-folder so I needed the list of files to be relative to the Rails root instead of relative to the git repo root (although git status in general seems to respect the --relative option, git status --porcelain seems to not).

https://github.com/rycus86/githooks is a really option for managing hooks It is... safe (it uses an opt-in model, where it will ask for confirmation whether new or changed scripts should be run or not (or disabled)) configurable handles a lot of the details for you lets you keep your hooks nicely organized. For example:

Whether you agree or not, to me there's nothing in this world that is entirely apolitical - when there are people there is politics. You don't have to agree with my views, nor do I expect you to. Diversity and disagreement is what drives mankind forward.

Same feature in TypeScript¶ It's worth mentioning that other languages have a shortcut for assignment var assignment directly from constructor parameters. So it seems especially painful that Ruby, despite being so beautifully elegant and succinct in other areas, still has no such shortcut for this. One of those other languages (CoffeeScript) is dead now, but TypeScript remains very much alive and allows you to write this (REPL): class Foo { constructor(public a:number, public b:number, private c:number) { } } instead of this boilerplate: class Foo { constructor(a, b, c) { this.a = a; this.b = b; this.c = c; } } (The public/private access modifiers actually disappear in the transpiled JavaScript code because it's only the TypeScript compiler that enforces those access modifiers, and it does so at compile time rather than at run time.) Further reading: https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/2/classes.html#parameter-properties https://basarat.gitbook.io/typescript/future-javascript/classes#define-using-constructor https://kendaleiv.com/typescript-constructor-assignment-public-and-private-keywords/ I actually wouldn't mind being able to use public/private modifiers on instance var parameters in Ruby, too, but if we did, I would suggest making that be an additional optional shortcut (for defining accessor methods for those instance vars) that builds on top of the instance var assignment parameter syntax described here. (See more detailed proposal in #__.) Accessors are more of a secondary concern to me: we can already define accessors pretty succinctly with attr_accessor and friends. The bigger pain point that I'm much more interested in having a succinct shortcut for is instance var assignment in constructors. initialize(@a, @b, @c) syntax¶ jsc (Justin Collins) wrote in #note-12: jjyr (Jinyang Jiang) wrote: I am surprised this syntax has been repeatedly requested and rejected since 7 years ago. ... As someone who has been writing Ruby for over 10 years, this syntax is exactly that I would like. I grow really tired of writing def initialize(a, b, c) @a = a @b = b @c = c end This would be perfect: def initialize(@a, @b, @c) end I'm a little bit sad Matz is against this syntax, as it seems so natural to me. Me too!! I've been writing Ruby for over 15 years, and this syntax seems like the most obvious, simple, natural, clear, unsurprising, and Ruby-like. I believe it would be readily understood by any Rubyist without any explanation required. Even if you saw it for the first time, I can't think of any way you could miss or misinterpret its meaning: since @a is in the same position as a local variable a would normally be, it seems abundantly clear that instead of assigning to a local variable, we're just assigning to the variable @a instead and of course you can reference the @a variable in the constructor body, too, exactly the same as you could with a local variable a passed as an argument. A workaround pattern¶ In the meantime, I've taken to defining my constructor and list of public accessors (if any) like this: attr_reader \ :a, :b def new( a, b) @a, @b = a, b end ... which is still horrendously boilerplatey and ugly, and probably most of you will hate — but by lining up the duplicated symbols into a table of columns, I like that I can at least more easily see the ugly duplication and cross-check that I've spelled them all correctly and handled them all consistently. :shrug: Please??¶ Almost every time I write a new class in Ruby, I wish for this feature and wonder if we'll ever get it. Can we please?

Thanks, this was just what I was looking for! This is a perfect appropriate use of instance_eval. I do not understand the nay-sayers. If you already have your array in a variable, then sure, a.reduce(:+) / a.size.to_f is pretty reasonable. But if you want to "in line" find the mean of an array literal or an array that is returned from a function/expression — without duplicating the entire expression ([0,4,8].reduce(:+) / [0,4,8].length.to_f, for example, is abhorrent) or being required to assign to a local, then instance_eval option is a beautiful, elegant, idiomatic solution!!

instance_eval is analogous to using tap, yield_self, … when you are dealing with a chain of method calls: do use it whenever it's appropriate and helpful! And in this case, I absolutely believe that it is.

What a convenient little elision for the Valley, the seat of real power. They’re not the repressive force; opposing them is. All they want is to let us be as free as when we were kids.

Essentially we're trying to figure out when it's appropriate for "my" code to become "everyones" code, and if there are steps in between. ("Standard library", for example.)

Yeah, can we pay money to make this go faster? Serious question.

// A general key transform method. Pass it a function that accepts the old key and returns // the new key. // // @example // obj = transformKeys(obj, (key) => ( // key.replace(/\b(big)\b/g, 'little') // )) export function transformKeys(source, f) { return Object.entries(source).reduce((o, [key, value]) => { o[f(key) || key] = value return o }, {}) } // Provide an object that maps from old key to new key export function rekeyObject(source, keyMap) { transformKeys(source, key => keyMap[key]) }

Maa ngiy waxtaan ak sama xarit.

Sama nijaay aj na ñaari yoon.

commented

TylerRick

TylerRick

commented

Why let other websites and social platforms tell your story? Share the real, authentic you the way you want to, and when you want to.

About auto-close bots... I can appreciate the need for issue grooming, but surely there must a better way about it than letting an issue or PR's fate be semi-permanently decided and auto-closed by an unknowing bot. Should I be periodically pushing up no-op commits or adding useless "bump" comments in order to keep that from happening? I know the maintainers are busy people, and that it can take a long time to work through and review 100s of open issues and PRs, so out of respect to them, I was just taking a "be patient; they'll get to it when they get to it" approach. Sometimes an issue is not so much "stale" as it is unnoticed, forgotten about, or consciously deferred for later. So if anything, after a certain length of time, if a maintainer still hasn't reviewed/merged/accepted/rejected a pull request, then perhaps it should instead be auto-bumped, put on top of the queue, to remind them that they (preferably a human) still need to review it and make a decision about its fate... :)

Internal Sass features have also moved into the module system, so we have complete control over the global namespace.

The reason that this solves our problem is: we now have full control over the module loading order. Whatever the import order in internal.js is, will be our module loading order.

Also, it looks like the sandbox, as posted, is not actually doing any debouncing.

TylerRick commented

you expect some hyperbole during these presentations and you should of course question and verify the claims being made.

answered

commented

The benefit of this approach is that rather than having these defaults and fighting against them, it’s fully up to you to decide how to handle everything.

commented

commented

The dynamic routes are a great way to keep the routing.rb DRY and avoid unneeded dependencies between the routing and the controller files That is exactly the problem: I've already defined the (white)list of actions in the controller; I just want to make them all available via routes. I shouldn't have to repeat myself in the routes file.

Tyler Rick

#3

commented

TylerRick commented

commented

commented

est it using bash -c 'echo ${!#}' arg1 arg2 arg3.

answered

To anyone running across this in the modern era, as I did:

Updated to add .join. Also looked like the 2nd example was missing result.save so added that too. Haven't tested the code, so hopefully it is correct...

Repeats

TylerRick commented

TylerRick commented

Our hope is that once a formal specification for these extensions is settled, this patchset can be used as a base to upstream the changes in the original project.

Secure input fields. 1Password uses secure input fields to prevent other tools from knowing what you type in the 1Password apps. This means that your personal information, including your Master Password, is protected against keyloggers.

answered

I came up with a Delegator-like implementation of this that I called DelegatorToAll

“By using a mask, even if it doesn’t do a lot, it moves the locus of control to you, away from the virus. It gives the individual a greater sense of control in this otherwise not-controlled situation.”

just a shift from companies focused on second-party data to those focused on first-party data

Such a corporate structure helps contain the otherwise massive potential fines which are derived from the company's worldwide revenue.  However, the worldwide part would in practice be limited to the EU as that is the only market such a subsidiary would operate in.

Matomo continues to champion the right for people to be in control of their own information.

Take the challenge: Compare your Google Analytics data (sampled data) against your Matomo data.

People believe in us for that reason, and we will continue to champion the right for people to be in control of their data.

it is possible to verify this yourself by noting that we don’t have any analytics tool installed in the code of that page

prepend_message

Here’s how to check it:

It may not sound that impressive today, now that file sharing is built into most modern operating systems, but it was cutting edge stuff 25 years ago.

select an origin

commented

To execute Arel queries, we first need to get the SQL out of Arel and then feed it into find_by_sql.

small coins of possibility