StackOverflow.com

When I try to use typeOf keyword in ES6 javascript, the output is always object. I want to know deeply why does it work in such way. Is it a bug or just a fact in javascritp?

Can anyone help, M new to codeforces, m trying to submit a solution but cannot ffigure out the problem, on linux if it matters

<?php namespace App\Http\Controllers; use App\Models\harvest_logs; use App\Models\harvest_shifts; use Illuminate\Http\Request; use Illuminate\Http\JsonResponse; class HarvestLogController extends Controller { /** * Display a listing of harvest logs with user and shift information. * GET /api/harvest-logs */ public function index(): JsonResponse { // Lekérjük az összes szüreti naplót a felhasználó és szüreti időszak adataival $harvestLogs = harvest_logs::with(['user', 'harvestShift']) ->get() ->map(function ($log) { return [ 'id' => $log->id, 'user_id' => $log->user_id, 'harvest_shift_id' => $log->harvest_shift_id, 'datum' => $log->datum, 'kilogram' => $log->kilogram, 'timestamp' => $log->created_at, // Automatikus time

I recently joined a company project built using Spring Boot 2.x. The project exposes REST APIs, but instead of modern annotations like: @RestController @PostMapping the code uses older style patterns like this: @ResponseBody @RequestMapping(value = "/save", method = RequestMethod.POST, produces = "application/json") public ResponseEntity<String> save(@RequestBody String input) { JSONObject response = new JSONObject(); try { JSONObject request = new JSONObject(input); if (request.isNull("name")) { return new ResponseEntity<>("Invalid input", HttpStatus.BAD_REQUEST); } JSONObject result = service.save(request); return new ResponseEntity<>(result.toString(), HttpStatus.OK); } catch (Exception e) { response.put("message", e.getMessage()); return new ResponseEntity<>(respons

Given the following code snippet: from transformers import AutoTokenizer, AutoModelForSequenceClassification import torch device = torch.device("cuda" if torch.cuda.is_available() else "cpu") model_id = "cross-encoder/nli-deberta-v3-large" model = AutoModelForSequenceClassification.from_pretrained(model_id) tokenizer = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained(model_id) model.to(device) I get the following warning: DebertaV2ForSequenceClassification LOAD REPORT from: cross-encoder/nli-deberta-v3-large Key | Status | Details --------------------------------+------------+-------- deberta.embeddings.position_ids | UNEXPECTED | Notes: - UNEXPECTED: can be ignored when loading from different task/architecture; not ok if you expect identical arch. $ pip show transformers Name: transformers Version: 5.5.3 Summary: Transformers: the model-definition framework

I am upgrading a codebase to Python 3.12 and migrating our generic classes to use the new PEP 695 syntax, e.g.: class Box[T]: ... instead of: T = TypeVar('T') class Box(Generic[T]): ... Most of it works, but I’ve hit a NameError when attempting to dynamically inspect type hints on a subclass method if that method was wrapped by a custom decorator in the parent class: from functools import wraps import typing # A standard route/event tracking decorator that preserves annotations def track_event(func): @wraps(func) def wrapper(*args, **kwargs): return func(*args, **kwargs) # We explicitly sync annotations for an external API generator tool wrapper.__annotations__ = func.__annotations__ return wrapper # Parent generic class using Python 3.12+ syntax class BaseService[T]: @track_e

I'm building a WhatsApp Coexistence integration using the Embedded Signup flow. According to the official docs, a Tech Provider must meet certain thresholds before the onboarding option appears. My setup: Embedded Signup implemented and working WABA connected via Cloud API Business verified on Meta The problem: Even after meeting the documented eligibility criteria, the Tech Provider option does not appear in Business Manager or WhatsApp Manager. Specific technical questions: Is there an API endpoint to check Tech Provider eligibility status programmatically? Does the whatsapp_business_messaging permission need a specific app review approval to unlock this? Is the Tech Provider UI flag enabled server-side by Meta, or is it tied to a specific app/permission scope? I've already checked app review status, business portfolio permissions, and embedded signup configuration. Looking for anyone who has debugged this at the API/permission level.

I found an issue with diff v3.12 and option --from-file, system OpenSUSE tumbleweed. If I use command diff FILE1 FILE2 FILE3 --from-file OTHER-DIR/ (with and without trailing slash), only FILE1 is compared. For the other files I get the message: "diff: OTHER-DIR: No such file or directory". All files exist! If I remove FILE1 from the source list, only FILE2 is compared. At an old system, this commands works perfect. I use this type of command for decades and had never such issues. Can you confirm this bug? Some test code: # create files mkdir -p other-dir for f in {,other-dir/}file{1,2,3}.tmp; do echo "$f" > "$f"; done # test diff file{1,2,3}.tmp --from-file other-dir/ diff file{1,2,3}.tmp --to-file other-dir/ # cleanup rm -r file{1,2,3}.tmp other-dir/

The official documentation for DotNet Code Analysis Rule CA1070 "Do not declare event fields as virtual" says: Do not declare virtual events in a base class. Overridden events in a derived class have undefined behavior. The C# compiler does not handle this correctly and it is unpredictable whether a subscriber to the derived event will actually be subscribing to the base class event. Huh? The official C# programming guide corroborates this, using very similar wording: Do not declare virtual events in a base class and override them in a derived class. The C# compiler does not handle these correc

I am facing an optimisation issue with avr-gcc 14.2 on debian. I have the following code (I have shortened the code and immediate assembler for better overview): void function(uint8_t byte){ cli(); uint8_t bit = 0x01; while (1) { // for (uint8_t bit = 0x01; bit != 0; bit <<=1) { if (byte & bit) { // Write high // do something not using byte or bit variables } else { // Write low // do something else not using byte or bit variables } bit = bit << 1; if (bit == 0) break; } sei(); } The immediate assembler that is being generated by avr gcc (from output.elf.ltrans0.ltrans.s): cli ; 0 "" 2 /* #NOAPP */ ldi r18,lo8(8) ; ivtmp_65, ldi r19,0 ; ivtmp_65 ; routine.c:93: uint8_t bit = 0x01; ldi r25,lo8(1) ; bit, .L42: ;removed code prior to if related to what happens