Is Software-Engineering beyond the scope of StackOverflow? Are questions specifically about Software Engineering (modelling, requirements gather, etc) off-topic for StackOverflow?  was closed as off-topic, but it seemed like a good question to me.   It seems to fall under  :   software tools commonly used by programmers practical, answerable problems that are unique to software development   While it's a bit of a stretch, it's no more so than any other UML question and there a lots of those.
Which computer science / programming Stack Exchange sites do I post on? There seems to be more than a few computer science/programming Stack Exchange networks (is that the correct term?). Stack Overflow, being the first, has by far the most users, questions, and answers.  What is the reasoning for creating the others, and are there clear guidelines for which kinds of questions should be posted? I can see a large amount of potential overflow, many cases of people not getting a good answer to their question, because the person who has the answer isn't browsing that particular network at the moment.  I understand that they were probably created for organizational purposes, but wouldn't it almost make more sense to just have them as categories under Stack Overflow, keep them separated but still connected, instead of making people have to create multiple 'account's, one for each network?  I am sure there was a very good reason to break them up, but as someone that is new to SE, it can be somewhat intimidating to decide which one to post in to ensure you get a good answer. For example, if I am a computer science student, my first instinct might to be to post in the computer science network, until I see that it literally has 1% of the users as the Stack Overflow network, which still seems to be for programming/computer science related questions.  So my second instinct would then to be to post it into the Stack&nbsp;Overflow site on the basis that I have a significantly higher chance of my question being seen and getting a good answer. Then I notice that there is also a 'programmers' network, and I don't even begin to know where that fits in. I, and I am assuming most people, will probably just post on Stack&nbsp;Overflow to be safe.  My question is, other than the short little description blurb of each one, is there a clear cut set of guidelines which what each network is intended for, what kinds of questions should go to each one, and is anything being done to encourage people to post in these newer, smaller (more specialized?) networks as opposed to just posting in big daddy Stack Overflow?  Now again, this is for computer science/programming/"why isn't this code doing what I want?" related questions, I am not saying that if I had a question about Linux or WordPress or something I would have the same confusion.
How can I model the mechanics of an army battlefield scene? TL;DR;  I want to model a strategic battlefield fight for my players to command and participate. I'm seeking advice on how to model it mechanically so that it is exciting for the players.  Background  The final scene of Act II of my campaign is envisioned to be a big battle between the army of the Big Bad and the allied forces gathered by my players. The full set of Act II runs with the players gaining the allegiance of the different factions to support them on the fight.  Now, in terms of that final scene, I'm struggling to decide how to DM the fight. In games and movies the action is made epic by having cinematic scenes of the fight happening with cuts to our heroes doing their amazing things, be it just plowing through dozens of enemies in quick succession or fighting the big ugly overpowered monster that is otherwise cause havoc among the army. I want that feeling  The set up will involve an army of several thousand enemies agains the different forces gathered by my players. Depending on what they've done during the second act, they'll have more or less support with a minimum number of regiments belonging to several faction (i.e. the silver guard of Wizardwight).  Intended way of DMing the scenario.  What I've come up with is to have the players be military leaders. Draw the map of the battlefield and have them manage the battlefield strategically and tactically, distributing the units and, somehow, enabling a dice based mechanism to evaluate how well each unit is doing. This will transform the tabletop into something similar to Warhammer Fantasy. They can choose to join a particular place of the battlefield to help either together or separately.  I have absolutely no idea on how to model this mechanically (as far as I know D&amp;D 5e does not cover this kind of fights).  Question:  What are good ways to mechanically model this kind of strategic army combat? Should I switch to a different system just for this scene or can I model this with D&amp;D 5e?  Notes on level: At this point I expect my players to range between level 9-12 and for the party to be between 3 and 4 players (this is not a limitation of the campaign, more like the players I'm running the campaign with). If $f^2$ is an analytic function then so is $f$ I want to show the following:  If $f(z) $ is a continuous  function on a connected open subset of the complex plane and $f(z)^2$ is an analytic function, then $f(z)$ is analytic.  Clearly if $f(z) \neq 0$ then $$\frac{f(z+h)-f(z)}{h}=\frac{f(z+h)^2-f(z)^2}{h}.\frac{1}{f(z+h)+f(z)}$$  which shows $f^\prime(z) $ exists if $f(z)\neq0$.  What do I do when $f(z) =0$? Why GCP Kubernetes Node host location for europe-north1 seems to be in US? I am new to both Google Cloud Platform and K8s. I have launched Kubernetes cluster in GCP and chosen europe-north1 as the region (europe-north1-a as the zone).   When I try to run my application on this cluster it fails because it expects the application to run in EU region. I added IP and Geo check (using GeoLite database () and AWS IP check tool ()) into my application and they tell me that the host is located in US.  Have I perhaps missed some GCP/K8s configuration option or is this because the europe-north1 region is still quite new and the IP addresses do not correctly show that they are located in EU? In which case I should direct this question to Google? Does there exist a smooth approximation of $x \bmod y$? I'm looking for a function $m(x,y)$ that smoothly approximates $x \bmod y$, and I'm assuming there would be some $n$ or $\varepsilon$ in the body of $m(x,y)$ that defines the degree of approximation such that as $n$ goes to infinity or $\varepsilon$ goes to zero,  $$ m(x,y)= x \bmod y. $$  I've looked at, for example, $\sin(x/y)$ and have been trying to figure out ways to make $\sin(x)$ more "steep" so that I can apply such techniques to $\sin(x/y)$ in order to perhaps more closely approximate $x \bmod y$.  The analogy I'm looking at is the approximation of $\mid x\mid$ as $\sqrt{x^2 + \varepsilon)}$ where epsilon is some small quantity.  Does a similarly smooth function exist for $x \bmod y$? In classical logic, why is $(p\Rightarrow q)$ True if $p$ is False and $q$ is True? Provided we have this truth table where "$p\implies q$" means "if $p$ then $q$":  $$\begin{array}{|c|c|c|} \hline p&amp;q&amp;p\implies q\\ \hline T&amp;T&amp;T\\ T&amp;F&amp;F\\ F&amp;T&amp;T\\ F&amp;F&amp;T\\\hline \end{array}$$  My understanding is that "$p\implies q$" means "when there is $p$, there is q". The second row in the truth table where $p$ is true and $q$ is false would then contradict "$p\implies q$" because there is no $q$ when $p$ is present.  Why then, does the third row of the truth table not contradict "$p\implies q$"? If $q$ is true when $p$ is false, then $p$ is not a condition of $q$.  I have not taken any logic class so please explain it in layman's terms.       Administrative note. You may experience being directed here even though your question was actually about line 4 of the truth table instead. In that case, see the companion question  And even if your original worry was about line 3, it might be useful to skim the other question anyway; many of the answers to either question attempt to explain both lines. Adding console.log to every function automatically Why is "union" an exception to the "a/an" rule? Why is the Apps flash storage so high and how can it be reduced? This is the disk storage info:    This is the Applications folder info:    Why is the storage usage so high and how can it be reduced? This is on a MacBook Pro Retina 13" with OSX 10.9.5.  Edit: I had tried all the suggestions made by @user3439894 in his answer but didn't mention it before posting. $\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}\frac{1}{(n+\alpha)^2}=\frac{\pi^2}{(\sin \pi \alpha)^2}$? Why does $(x \to a) ≠ (x = a)$ , But $f(x \to a) = f(x = a)$ Some applications simulate a virtual USB or CD Rom drive as if a USB drive is attached to the computer.  Is there any configuration or application that provides a virtual USB drive, not for the the operating system itself, but for other equipments which accept USB drive, through a USB port.  So I'll have a virtual hard disk (e.g. a *.vdi file) in the computer, which is connected, through a USB socket, as a USB drive to some other equipment (e.g. a cell phone or a laptop). Cross-referencing between different files I want to cross-reference between different .tex files, just because I want to put every chapters separately.  Let's say in file chapterI.tex I have \label{a} and I want to access this in file chapterII.tex using something like \ref{a}. How to do this exactly in LaTeX, moreover if LEd have an easy feature to cover this, it will be better (I have put those both files in the same project).  I found another question with similar title, but I just didn't really understand. It's here: . Single word describing a person new in something What is a word for someone who is totally new in something or participates in something for the first time? Are token creatures considerd as a creature spell? Eclipse is giving me a warning of the following form:     Type safety: Unchecked cast from Object to HashMap   This is from a call to an API that I have no control over which returns Object:  HashMap&lt;String, String&gt; getItems(javax.servlet.http.HttpSession session) {   HashMap&lt;String, String&gt; theHash = (HashMap&lt;String, String&gt;)session.getAttribute("attributeKey");   return theHash; }   I'd like to avoid Eclipse warnings, if possible, since theoretically they indicate at least a potential code problem.  I haven't found a good way to eliminate this one yet, though.  I can extract the single line involved out to a method by itself and add @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") to that method, thus limiting the impact of having a block of code where I ignore warnings.  Any better options?  I don't want to turn these warnings off in Eclipse.  Before I came to the code, it was simpler, but still provoked warnings:  HashMap getItems(javax.servlet.http.HttpSession session) {   HashMap theHash = (HashMap)session.getAttribute("attributeKey");   return theHash; }   Problem was elsewhere when you tried to use the hash you'd get warnings:  HashMap items = getItems(session); items.put("this", "that");  Type safety: The method put(Object, Object) belongs to the raw type HashMap.  References to generic type HashMap&lt;K,V&gt; should be parameterized. Proof, is $\forall x : (P(x) \lor Q(x)) \Leftrightarrow \forall x : P(x) \lor \forall x : Q(x)$? I have to prove if the following statement is true or false $$\forall x : (P(x) \lor Q(x)) \Leftrightarrow \forall x : P(x) \lor \forall x : Q(x)$$  I understand the first statement as, for every $x$, at least one of the functions $P$, $Q$ is true. For the second statement, at least one of the functions $P$, $Q$ is true for every $x$. Is this correct? When yes, how could I prove this? Using the distributive law will clearly render me the wrong result. What differentiates the scientific method from other methods From the controversy in , I would like to know what differentiates "the scientific method" from other method.  I'm asking for differentiation, rather than a definition, because definitions call for an all encompassing answer, which is often hard to find.  If someone asks "what is an alternative to the scientific method," I would like to be able to start by being able to reliably say whether a particular method is the scientific method or not.  Of course, being a linguistic issue, the definitions of words themselves are flexible.  For instance, it is not uncommon to hear one in science talk of "truth" in a sense which is incompatable with the mathematical meaning of "truth."  Accordingly, I would like to stick to the following ideals in wording whenever possible:   Prefer mathematically accurate terminology.  Ideally the word "proof" should be used in the form found in proof theory, and "true" and "false" should be used in the form of Boolean algebra.   No method should claim a hypothesis which predicts the state of the future is "true" unless they claim soothsaying abilities (most scientific theories include a random variable to avoid needing to claim soothsaying abilities... this is legitimate)  Words which imply direction should be clarified carefully.  "Good" and "bad" are notoriously difficult, but phrases such as "advancing society" can also be very tricky as well. The physical world and the world of information theory should be treated differently.  In particular, the concept of "testing a hypothesis" will likely need to be broken down into testing and observing the physical world, taking measurements (which should have errors associated with them), and only then is the hypothesis compared against the results of the measurements. Mathematically extending arguments into infinity (such as claiming some specific cellular level learning process qualifies as the scientific method) are valid, but may rapidly make it harder to distinguish non-scientific methods from scientific ones.  Such claims should be made carefully, but they are not inherently invalid.   If these ideals are too strict, you may bend them, but you should qualify such choices with an explanation of why my recommended wording choices are too strict.  Their goal is to put different methodologies on the levelest playing fields that I can manage in this medium.  Being stack exchange, bonus points for references to existing theories, though you may need to paraphrase their results to fit with the ideals I'm recommending for these answers.  Answers may be tested two ways:   Positive: If we think something is the scientific method, does it meet the requirements set forth? Negative: If we think something is not the scientific method, does the answer explain why it is not? Can internal forces do work? My Mechanics textbook claims that the sum of the work by internal forces is not generally zero.  translated to English the paragraph reads:     Notice about the work by internal forces: the work by the internal forces is in general not equal to zero although the sum of the internal forces is always equal to zero. Since the work also depends on the relative displacement of the two pointmasses in the material system, the work provided by these 2 internal forces will generally not be equal to zero.   Other sources claim that the work done by internal forces is always zero.  (answer by Mark Eichenlaub)     Then I didn't do any work on the system at all since, by definition, only external forces can do work.        the net work done by internal forces is zero since they do not cause motion of the object.   To me it would seem that these sources contradict eachother. Do they? If so, which one is correct? If not, please explain why they don't contradict eachother. How to draw this P-V graph? Connected graph with colored edges We have connected undirected graph with colored edges in two way (green or blue). And also each vertex have the same number of green and blue edges. How to prove that there are alternate colored (green-blue) path between any two nodes?