Como o propósito da put option é a venda futura, vender put é abrir mão desse direito. Com a venda, o investidor perde a oportunidade de negociar a ação no futuro pelo preço pago. Ainda assim, quando opta pela venda, tem direito ao valor pago pela compra da opção.

opts = method(__method__).parameters.map(&:last).map { |p| [p, eval(p.to_s)] }.to_h SomeOtherObject.some_other_method(opts)

that's right, we don't want to do params = { ... } because then we're hardcoding the implementation and it becomes very coupled. The benefit of doing it like in my examples is that you can change the method signature and still automatically capture all keyword parameters.

Update API usage of the view helpers by changing javascript_packs_with_chunks_tag and stylesheet_packs_with_chunks_tag to javascript_pack_tag and stylesheet_pack_tag. Ensure that your layouts and views will only have at most one call to javascript_pack_tag or stylesheet_pack_tag. You can now pass multiple bundles to these view helper methods.

For every mile we don't drive, our air gets a little bit cleaner. There are many ways to drive less- walking, biking, taking transit, telecommuting, carpooling, and more. Driving less can also save you money and improve your emotional and physical health. Working from home has been gaining popularity and may offer other benefits such as improved productivity. 

Move it to Jest. This potentially requires extending our jsdom mocked browser environment. Move it to RSpec. This will probably require us changing our perspective to a use-case oriented one. We just want to make sure we have the same value coverage.

'set-cookie': response.headers.get('set-cookie')

If you do need to passthrough your mydomain.com cookies to a thirdparty.com domain, you can technically already do that now by implementing it as an endpoint and calling fetch('/my-endpoint')

I don't really want to re-implement all of my api endpoints to make this work. Is there a way to "mask" the thirdparty endpoints to pass through the cookies?

I've been thinking more about how to best do this. The preferred way might be to use the same domain and have an application load balancer like nginx split traffic on the URL path (e.g. /api). This is for two reasons. Firstly, you might not necessarily want to cookie the primary/apex domain and have the cookie shared across all subdomains. You also might not want to do CORS because preflight requests add latency and CORS adds complication.

We added the X-Content-Type-Options: nosniff header to our raw URL responses way back in 2011 as a first step in combating hotlinking. This has the effect of forcing the browser to treat content in accordance with the Content-Type header. That means that when we set Content-Type: text/plain for raw views of files, the browser will refuse to treat that file as JavaScript or CSS.

Software that is not currently being used gradually becomes unusable as the remainder of the application changes.

Infrequently used portions of code, such as document filters or interfaces designed to be used by other programs, may contain bugs that go unnoticed. With changes in user requirements and other external factors, this code may be executed later, thereby exposing the bugs and making the software appear less functional.

It is based on the idea that each validation is encapsulated by a simple, stateless predicate that receives some input and returns either true or false.

@adisos if reform-rails will not match, I suggest to use: https://github.com/orgsync/active_interaction I've switched to it after reform-rails as it was not fully detached from the activerecord, code is a bit hacky and complex to modify, and in overall reform not so flexible as active_interaction. It has multiple params as well: https://github.com/orgsync/active_interaction/blob/master/spec/active_interaction/modules/input_processor_spec.rb#L41

(optional googlesheet & zapier integration for any other email marketing software)

allow <slot> to be part of a slot

I want to make some add-ons or wrappers on components e.g BigButton.svelte <script> import Button from './Button.svelte' </script> <Button fz="16" h="64" {...$$props}> <slot slot="prepend" name="prepend" /> <slot /> <slot slot="append" name="append" /> </Button>

Related to #1824, can do <svelte:component this={Bar}> <slot></slot> <slot name="header" slot="header"></slot> </svelte:component> <script> import Bar from './Bar.svelte'; </script> as a forwarding workaround

I am trying to implements this usecase (a generic lazy loader component which forwards slots/events to the "real" component).

In 3.29.0 you can now use <slot slot='...'> to forward slots into a child component, without adding DOM elements.

Would love to see passthrough slots to create superset components, for example Table and TableWithPagination (table slots for TableWithPagination could be passed through to Table).

I’m not a dev either, so no Ubuntu fork, but I will perhaps be forced to look at Debian testing, without some advantages of Ubuntu - but now that Unity is gone (and I deeply regret it), gap would not be so huge anymore…

Notably, LLVM and JVM are by far the most prominent targets in this scenario: they’re both open-source and well-documented targets that provide a ton of firepower, and there frankly aren’t a ton of other options.

En ce sens, celui-ci ne peut légalement organiser une sélection pour l’accès à un enseignement optionne

. En ce sens, celui-ci ne peut légalement organiser une sélection pour l’accès à un enseignement optionnel10. En revanche, le refus de procéder en cours d’année, à un changement de l’option initialement choisie par l’élève constitue une décision faisant grief et comme telle, susceptible d’un recours en annulation11. Plus précisément, le chef d’établissement doit procéder à un examen au cas par cas des demandes d’abandon d’option en cours d’année. Il ne peut opposer un refus systématique à toutes les demandes qui lui sont présentées, en faisant seulement valoir que ces changements provoqueraient des perturbations dans le fonctionnement du service12.

All standard UI events are forwarded on components, input events ("input" and "change") are forwarded on input components, and all MDC events are forwarded.

You can add props to lower components and elements with things like input$maxlength="15".

You can add actions to the components with use={[Action1, [Action2, action2Props], Action3]}.

All standard UI events are forwarded.

class: '' - A CSS class string.

use: [] - An array of actions and/or action/property arrays.

Note that you can also use dynamic partials, that conditionally select the partial to render based on the value in the JSON.

As of OpenSSL 1.1.1, providing subjectAltName directly on command line becomes much easier, with the introduction of the -addext flag to openssl req

I debugged docker-compose and docker-py and figured out that you should either use environment variables or options in command. You should not mix these . If you even specify --tls in command then you will have to specify all the options as the TLSConfig object, as now TLSConfig object is created completely from the command options and operide the TFSConfig object created from the environment variable.

we update the validation schema on the fly (we had a similar case with a validation that needs to be included whenever some fetch operation was completed)

What would happen if we get the list from a rest api when the form component is mounted? That's an interesting topic, you can add a rule once a component has been mounted and update the associated validation schema.

Ok, I have seen that there are lot of built-in and third party validations, but sooner or later I will face a validation rule not covered by this buffet. Can I build a custom one? Of course you can!

React Final Forms is a great library, an enhanced version of Redux Form

We are looking to use React Final Form in our application at work. Evaluating our options and reading the documentation, we couldn't figure out how to address a specific use case.

In a later major, we'd stop extracting key from props and therefore props is now just passthrough.

instead of closing immediately, could we discuss some syntaxes that might work? I'm hardly an expert, so I'm not sure I can propose a syntax, but I can try to get the ball rolling:

I can't add special props and keywords to every single component I have and will ever create for this to work.

Explicitly exposing any attributes that might get overridden by a parent seems impractical to me.

There are usually very little amount of properties that a component relays on

Svelte will not offer a generic way to support style customizing via contextual class overrides (as we'd do it in plain HTML). Instead we'll invent something new that is entirely different. If a child component is provided and does not anticipate some contextual usage scenario (style wise) you'd need to copy it or hack around that via :global hacks.

Explicit interfaces are preferable, even if it places greater demand on library authors to design both their components and their style interfaces with these things in mind.

The point of the feature is to not rely on the third-party author of the child component to add a prop for every action under the sun. Rather, they could just mark a recipient for actions on the component (assuming there is a viable target element), and then consumers of the library could extend the component using whatever actions they desire.

Your LazyLoad image is now inextensible. What if you want to add a class? Perhaps the author of LazyLoad thought of that and sets className onto the <img>. But will the author consider everything? Perhaps if we get {...state} attributes.

You'll have to create a new component that brings in the functionality of both. TooltipButton, TooltipLink, Link, and TooltipRoutedLink. We're starting to get a lot of components to handle a bit of added functionality.

For the tooltip example, if you had a whole bunch of tooltips on different elements, it would be annoying to have different event listeners and "should it be shown" variables for each one.

Perhaps at that point we're better off settling on a way to pass components through as parameters? <!-- App.html --> <Outer contents={Inner}/> <!-- Outer.html --> <div> <div>Something</div> <[contents] foo='bar'/> </div>

I would hope for it to come with React-like behavior where I could pass in a string (like div or a) and have it show up as a normal div/a element when the child component used it.

Use case: Wrapper components that need to render an element (e.g. because they attach event listeners). You'd probably use a <div> there by default but there may be places where this is not desirable for semantic reasons (e.g. in lists).

const components = { Label, Tree, Menu };

The lack of spread continues to be a big pain for me, adding lots of difficult-to-maintain cruft in my components. Having to maintain a list of all possible attributes that I might ever need to pass through a component is causing me a lot of friction in my most composable components.

If you want to listen to an event on some deeply nested component, the intermediate components must forward the event.

We should also allow passing unrecognised props to the rendered component. eg: tabindex might be required on some instances of a component, and not all. Why should developers have to add tabindex support to their components just that it may potentially be used

You could do something like this instead while maintaining complete control of where different props go. <div class="wrapper> <div {...$$props} > ... </div> </div>

Il faudrait procéder à une analyse très précise de la manière dont les options ont été implantées, suivies, favorisées dans les établissements concernés, examiner les raisons du peu de succès dans certains autres.

Designing with constraints. Using inline styles, every value is a magic number. With utilities, you're choosing styles from a predefined design system, which makes it much easier to build visually consistent UIs.

All of the components should allow passing MUI configuration properties to them so that they can be easily customized. In the case of RFF and MUI components with deeply nested structures of multiple subcomponents, you can pass the properties in with sepecial top level properties. This is very hard to document fully without making a mess, so please refer to the source code and demos for examples.

Sadly, bash can't handle long options which would be more readable, i.e.:

Is there any reason to NOT have a swap file on CentOS

Do you consider visitor interaction with the home page video an important engagement signal? If so, you would want interaction with the video to be included in the bounce rate calculation, so that sessions including only your home page with clicks on the video are not calculated as bounces. On the other hand, you might prefer a more strict calculation of bounce rate for your home page, in which you want to know the percentage of sessions including only your home page regardless of clicks on the video.

Some are not bad, others have a bit too many quirks and probably justify a bit of ranting for having wasted part of my life

. (2018: but this won’t be focal on the exam.)

More volatile underlying assets will translate to higher options premiums, because with volatility there is a greater probability that the options will end up in-the-money at expiration.

The option is European and can only be exercised at expiration.No dividends are paid out during the life of the option.Markets are efficient (i.e., market movements cannot be predicted).There are no transaction costs in buying the option.The risk-free rate and volatility of the underlying are known and constant.The returns on the underlying are normally distributed.

propsToPass

PASSTHROUGH_PROPS

From the man pages The environment variables can be specified in lower case or upper case. The lower case version has precedence. http_proxy is an exception as it is only available in lower case. Using an environment variable to set the proxy has the same effect as using the --proxy option

to home broadband

Default Value

they are wrestling with how to get more Latinos to pick a race. In 2010, they tested different wording in questions and last year they held focus groups, with a report on the research scheduled to be released by this summer.

The other way to help these students would be to dramatically reduce the price or time required to get an education of acceptable quality (and for acceptable read “enabling the student to get a better job”, their commonest goal.) This is a worse option in every respect except one, which is that it may be possible.

We distributed options every month, at a slight discount from the market price. We had no vesting period—the options could be cashed in immediately. Most tech companies have a four-year vesting schedule and try to use options as “golden handcuffs” to aid retention, but we never thought that made sense. If you see a better opportunity elsewhere, you should be allowed to take what you’ve earned and leave. If you no longer want to work with us, we don’t want to hold you hostage.