(This isn't a duplicate because it's explicitly seeking a workaround given certain constraints, not just asking for direct replacement.)

I suggest you to make this a new question. This will also get better answers.

by system we eliminate duplication, we concentratecontrol;

Closing this issue down as a duplicate for now. If you feel that neither of these issues exactly fits your own proposal, pleae don't hesitate to reopen the issue. 😃

It's also common to want to compute the transitive closure of these relations, for instance, in listing all the issues that are, transitively, duped to the current one to hunt for information about how to reproduce them.

This question is not duplicate as you marked it. My situation is different

I've been struggling with duplicate notes within my Zettelkasten. .t3_17ajd34._2FCtq-QzlfuN-SwVMUZMM3 { --postTitle-VisitedLinkColor: #9b9b9b; --postTitleLink-VisitedLinkColor: #9b9b9b; --postBodyLink-VisitedLinkColor: #989898; }

The question is similar but its in a Rails context. The solutions would answer my question, but I'm almost certain that he could probably leverage Arel to solve his problem. The question I posted was designed purely as a Ruby question so that it was easier to search for. You might want to suggest an edit of the title of his question because it didn't show up when I searched for a solution to my problem.

Yes, unfortunately the other question has a misleading and completely irrelevant Rails context and might be harder to find for some people. IMHO, it's still a perfect content duplicate, although not a topic one. Answers are also equal. Anyways, still a good question of yours.

I'd like to think this issue isn't quite a duplicate

Yes, but honestly, and no offense intended, but I don't see the harm in these type questions, nor why some people are offended when they are asked. If I owed a website, I wouldn't mind it because it just creates more pages that can be indexed. I see it as helping the website. But, I did look and didn't see a simple answer. Again, no offense is intended. I've just never understood the complaints.

I have checked the following close stackoverflow sources : Relation passed to #or must be structurally compatible. Incompatible values: [:references]

Duplicate of #12079, please move all correspondence there!

It would be better if you asked a new question. In the worst case scenario, it would be marked as a duplicate (which still means you would probably get some sort of resolution).

If you've found a problem in Ruby on Rails which is not a security risk, do a search on GitHub under Issues in case it has already been reported. If you are unable to find any open GitHub issues addressing the problem you found, your next step will be to open a new one.

It's funny that in such a complex gem like this, there's only one open issue, exactly about what I came here to post.

Given an LSH familyH, the LSH scheme amplifiesthe gap between the high probabilityP1and the lowprobabilityP2by concatenating several functions

We used the following publicly available real datasets in the experiment