Javascript strange result of the sum My application works fine, but sometimes it return "strange" result, I dont't understand why it happens. For ex:   var a = 80.78, b = 83.49, c = 45.33 alert (a+b+c); //209.59999999999997 instead of 209.60   Thanks A.
Is floating point math broken? Consider the following code:   0.1 + 0.2 == 0.3  -&gt;  false   0.1 + 0.2         -&gt;  0.30000000000000004   Why do these inaccuracies happen?
Find the radius of the inscribed circle of a right triangle. Find the radius of the inscribed circle of a right triangle. The triangle's height is $\sqrt{6} + \sqrt{2}$ while the bisector of the right angle is 4.  This seemed like a generic similar triangles problem but it isn't that simple when I tried to solve it. Any help?  EDIT: Here is a picture of the problem AMD-V is not enabled in VirtualBox on AMD APU What are point objects? How do I work with Root objects? At the start of Harry Potter and the Philosopher's/Sorceror's Stone Voldemort's Killing Curse backfires      due to Lily's sacrifice protecting Harry from Voldemort.   leaving Harry with his scar      and a loose piece of Voldemort's soul   and Voldemort as a loose soul, self-described as "Less than a ghost".  Voldemort was not dead, but had no physical body (until he got better in book 4).  What happened to his body?  Did it disappear?  Or was it left in the rubble of the house, alongside the bodies of James and Lily? Gray cone obscuring/clipping the 3D Viewport Is it proper usage to replace a comma in a list with a semi-colon in this situation (see details)? While writing a proposal at work today I needed to mention a list of things and within that list were multi-part items. It seems like replacing the comma with a semi-colon in this situation would make the sentence easier to understand, but is it correct usage?  With standard punctuation this could get confusing:       Some of my favorite things to do are   camping, playing football and   baseball, watching Laurel and Hardy   Movies, and traveling.   Proposed alternative. Is this acceptable usage?       Some of my favorite things to do are   camping; playing football and   baseball; watching Laurel and Hardy   Movies; and traveling. EEA Family Permit: No appointments are currently available for this location My Austrian husband and I will be travelling to the UK in April 2019 so I've applied for the EEA (just like before). I can't really wait with my application till January (3 months until the trip) because we'll be abroad in February and I need my passport back for that.  Upon filling out the application I saw some appointments on Dec, 27 that I couldn't book because we'll be on vacation in another country that week.  For the last three days, there have been no appointments available at all, I keep getting the message "No appointments are currently available for this location" (that's for Vienna).  I have contacted the visa4uk support per Email. They told me to use the approved Internet browser and closed the ticket. I replied to their Email asking for further help since my issue wasn't of technical nature (I use an approved browser), but they don't seem to reply anymore.  So how can the situation with unavailable appointments be resolved?  13.12.2018 Edit after comment: My national residence permit is not the Article 10 card. Let's say I have a generic member in a class or method, like so: public class Foo&lt;T&gt; {     public List&lt;T&gt; Bar { get; set; }          public void Baz()     {         // get type of T     }    }  When I instantiate the class, the T becomes MyTypeObject1, so the class has a generic list property: List&lt;MyTypeObject1&gt;. The same applies to a generic method in a non-generic class: public class Foo {     public void Bar&lt;T&gt;()     {         var baz = new List&lt;T&gt;();                  // get type of T     } }  I would like to know what type of objects the list of my class contains. So what type of T does the list property called Bar or the local variable baz contain? I cannot do Bar[0].GetType(), because the list might contain zero elements. How can I do it? I'm working on exercises from Kunen and I'm stuck. I must proof that the following are equivalent:   There exists a sequence $\langle A_\alpha:\alpha&lt;\omega_1\rangle$ such that $\forall\alpha(A_\alpha\subset\alpha)$ and for all $A \subset \omega_1$ the set $\{\alpha \in \omega_1:A\cap\alpha=A_\alpha\}$ is stationary. ($\diamondsuit$-principle) There exists a sequence $\langle A_\alpha:\alpha&lt;\omega_1\rangle$ such that $\forall\alpha(A_\alpha\subset\alpha\times\alpha)$ and for all $A \subset \omega_1\times\omega_1$ the set $\{\alpha \in \omega_1:A\cap\alpha\times\alpha=A_\alpha\}$ is stationary. There exists a sequence $\langle f_\alpha:\alpha&lt;\omega_1\rangle$ such that $\forall\alpha(f_\alpha:\alpha\rightarrow\alpha)$ and for all $f : \omega_1\rightarrow\omega_1$ $\exists\alpha(f|\alpha=f_\alpha\wedge\alpha&gt;0)$ There exists a sequence $\langle f_\alpha:\alpha&lt;\omega_1\rangle$ such that $\forall\alpha(f_\alpha:\alpha\rightarrow\alpha)$ and for all $f : \omega_1\rightarrow\omega_1$ the set $\{\alpha \in \omega_1:f|\alpha=f_\alpha\}$ is stationary.   I have proved that $1\implies 2\implies 4\implies 3$ and that $4\implies 1,$ but I'm having problems on proving that $3\implies$ "something", because it only talks about one $\alpha$. Can someone help me? sql server 2008 management studio not checking the syntax of my query Light "diode" and 2nd law of thermodynamics If I had a light "diode" - an object that only allowed light (at least for a range of frequencies) to travel through it in one direction, would this necessarily allow violations of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics?  Or would it be possible to restrict other properties of the device such that it could be okay.  Why I think it should violate 2nd law:   I can place such devices at temperature T in a bath of thermal radiation at temperature T, such that it forms a box which only lets the light in or out.  This would appear to always allow one to create a thermal gradient.  Once a thermal gradient is formed, useful energy can be extracted.  This seems to allow useful energy to always be extracted from a thermal bath and thus give perpetual motion. Release one such device at temperature T in a bath of thermal radiation at temperature T.  Since the photons are absorbed or reflected in one direction, and undisturbed in the other, the device will start moving.  It can use a thermal bath to directly generate useful motion.   Why I think I'm missing something and such a device could potentially co-exist with the 2nd Law:   The above arguments seem valid if the diode was only 'partially' rectifying as well.  However there exist sunglasses which largely reflect on one side, but not from the other side. Researchers have succeeded in using meta-materials to create a "blackhole" for microwaves.   Can anyone help sort this out? A not free $\mathbb{Z}$-module From  I see that $\mathbb{Z}^{\mathbb{N}}$ is not a free abelian group. Someone can explain me why?  Thanks a lot! I use this program in Windows that's one-box and searches all of my drives. By default it lists all files, everywhere, in a single list. Is there a Linux graphical utility that does this? Downgrading from OS X 10.9.2 to 10.9 I'm new to tikz-qtree, and can't find an automatic way to do something that qtree did very nicely.  With qtree, if you don't have a label for a single intermediate node, you get a straight line from the grandmother to the granddaughter.  With tikz-qtree, you get a "kink".  Compare the following:  With qtree:  \documentclass{article} \usepackage{qtree}  \begin{document}  \Tree [ Wiiiiiiiiiide [ nar- -row ] ]  \Tree [ nrw [ wiiiiiiiiiiiii- -iiiiiiiiiiiide ] ]  \end{document}   With tikz-qtree  \documentclass{article} \usepackage{tikz,tikz-qtree}  \begin{document}  \Tree [ Wiiiiiiiiiide [ nar- -row ] ]  \Tree [ nrw [ wiiiiiiiiiiiii- -iiiiiiiiiiiide ] ]  \end{document}   Is there any way to get the nice straight line in tikz-qtree, or do I have to adjust it manually?  Thanks in advance. Bias and variance in leave-one-out vs K-fold cross validation How do  methods compare in terms of model variance and bias?   My question is partly motivated by this thread: . The answer there suggests that models learned with leave-one-out cross-validation have higher variance than those learned with regular $K$-fold cross-validation, making leave-one-out CV a worse choice.  However, my intuition tells me that in leave-one-out CV one should see relatively lower variance between models than in the $K$-fold CV, since we are only shifting one data point across folds and therefore the training sets between folds overlap substantially.  Or going in the other direction, if $K$ is low in the $K$-fold CV, the training sets would be quite different across folds, and the resulting models are more likely to be different (hence higher variance).  If the above argument is right, why would models learned with leave-one-out CV have higher variance? Is $29$ the only prime of the form $p^p+2$? $(document) vs. $("document") Applescript run from menu bar?