Iterating over nested list of equal elements
List of lists changes reflected across sublists unexpectedly
Cartoon in a world with magic stones wielded by four children which combine to become stronger, and can summon creatures Can you please help me find this animated show? There is a four member team with two boys and two girls. The boys can summon, with their stones, a rock golem (black wearing summoner) and a robot (orange wearing summoner). The two girls can summon something like a dragonfly (green wearing summoner, little girl) and the blue girl, I don't remember what she can summon.  I don't know where the animated show comes from.  By throwing the stone, they activate the stone's power. Each stone has different characters on it. When you don't match them correctly, you get a rebound effect. $\lim_{x\to 0} \frac{\sin x - x}{x^2}$ without L'Hospital or Taylor I'm putting some type on a path, a circle; but when I do it, the type is upside down. How can I flip it so it reads the right way up? See image below: How long can cooked food be safely stored at room/warm temperature? If I leave fully-cooked food (particularly meat) out at warm temperature - say on the counter or in a crock pot that's been turned off -  how long will it stay safe to eat?  Does it make any difference if I re-cook the food afterward? Avoiding labeling features if overlapped by another layer in QGIS? With QGIS 2.12.2, how can I set up layer labeling to avoid placing labels where features from another layer already exist?  For example, if I have a stream/river polyline layer that contains lake "centerlines", and I place a "lake" polygon layer above it in the drawing order, I don't want the river layer to place a label inside the lake.  Instead, I would rather have the river labeled outside of the lake (as needed).  That way, I can place labels from the lakes layer and I don't run into label collisions.  Here is an example, where (I have intentionally put the lines on top for visual purposes) what I am hoping to achieve is no river center-line labels shown inside the lake polygon: If $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} f(n+1) - f(n) = L$, prove that $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} f(n)/n = L$ Here's the problem in full. I've stared at it for hours and can't get anywhere, so a hint would be nice.  Suppose that $f:\mathbb N\rightarrow\mathbb R$. If $$\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}f(n+1)-f(n) = L$$ prove that $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}f(n)/n$ exists and equals $L$.  This problem is marked with the word "Cauchy", so I'm guessing Cauchy sequences or something related to them will be necessary, but I can't figure out what.  Edit: It appears as if the Stolz-Cesaro Theorem makes this quite easy. Unfortunately though, we have not discussed this, so I won't be able to use this. Is there a way to disable access to certain Settings components? Issue with particles in blender donut tutorial C# Check if a decimal has more than 3 decimal places? My work has decided to issue their own  (CA) to handle different aspects of our work securely without paying for certificates.   Cryptographically sign emails Encrypt email contents Make access to things like the company  client-certificate based. Revoke the keys of former employees automatically   They sent me a .pem file, and I'm not sure how to add it to my Ubuntu install. The instructions sent were: "Double-clicking on it on a Mac should install it."&nbsp;  How do I proceed? Do I need to do something with  to create a .key, .csr, or .crt file? I'm wondering how to approach duct work, piping, and wiring? In the past, I have used the spin tool to make corners, but I find it very cumbersome. How do you do duct work and piping? I have seen people use curves, but I find it's hard to get straight 90 degree angles or just uniform angling across the whole model. It's also hard connecting piping together if they started from different locations. Here's some reference: addtocontents not working with certain other packages Do reactions interrupt their triggers or not? In the Player's Handbook, it is pretty clear that reactions normally interrupt the thing that they are reacting to.    Xanathar's Guide to Everything, however, has explicitly changed all reactions to occurring after their triggers have finished resolving unless the ability specifies otherwise, and is reliant on that implicit assumption for several reaction abilities already.  This leads to contradictory interpretations of reactions that take implicit timing. How should this be resolved?   I'm particularly interested in how to resolve this in Adventurers League games, where players show up with perfectly legal characters reasonably expecting their abilities to work either way on account of owning or not owning XGE. I block everything Google, including Google APIs, as I don't like to to have Google tracking all of my usage on the Internet. Is there any way to use Stack Exchange without Google APIs?  I usually am browsing with Windows 7 and Firefox, but of course not Firefox with StackExchange. How can I execute an equivalent of `head -z` when I don't have the `-z` option available? Error 1962: no operating system found after installing 12.04 (Lenovo ThinkCentre) I just installed a fresh copy of 12.04 on a new Lenovo ThinkCentere from a USB drive, and when I restarted after installation, the boot sequence didn't find the OS. Instead I got the 'no operating system found' error. When I started Ubuntu from the USB, I could see the HDD and that it had all the installed files. I just couldn't boot into it. It appeared that GRUB was not at the right place... or that there was something funky with the MBR. What is the simplest way to fix these sorts of errors?  Thank you,  EDIT: It appears the problem might have to do with UEFI and GRUB... Using subcaption package but subfigures end up stacked rather than side by side Endofunctors of $\textsf{FinVec}$ which are not $C^n$ Can you grapple/shove with the Hunter Ranger's Whirlwind Attack? The  states:     You can use your action to make a melee attack against any number of creatures within 5 feet of you, with a separate attack roll for each target.   The rules on "" state (the rules in shoving are effectively identical):     When you want to grab a creature or wrestle with it, you can use the Attack action to make a special melee attack, a grapple. If you're able to make multiple attacks with the Attack action, this attack replaces one of them.   I couldn't find any other features spells or abilities that allow a creature to make a flat "melee attack". If they had said "melee weapon attack" instead this would have meant the same thing but specifically have excluded grapple/shove as an option.  I am unsure whether the rules on grappling/shoving mean that the only time you can grapple/shove are when you take the Attack action, which you are not doing when using the Whirlwind Attack feature.   I would like answers to assume that the following ruling made in the  is correct:     Whirlwind Attack is unusual, in that it’s a single attack with multiple attack rolls... Since I started learning  and  last year, I've read a huge number of articles which insist that design patterns (especially in Java) are workarounds for the missing features in imperative languages. One article I found :     Most people I've met have read     by the Gang of   Four (GoF). Any self respecting programmer   will tell you that the book is   language agnostic and the patterns   apply to software engineering in   general, regardless of which language   you use. This is a noble claim.   Unfortunately it is far removed from   the truth.      Functional languages are extremely   expressive. In a functional language   one does not need design patterns   because the language is likely so high   level, you end up programming in   concepts that eliminate design   patterns all together.   The main features of functional programming (FP) include functions as first-class values, currying, immutable values, etc. It doesn't seem obvious to me that OO design patterns are approximating any of those features.  Additionally, in functional languages which support OOP (such as F# and OCaml), it seems obvious to me that programmers using these languages would use the same design patterns found available to every other OOP language. In fact, right now I use F# and OCaml every day, and there are no striking differences between the patterns I use in these languages vs. the patterns I use when I write in Java.  Is there any truth to the claim that functional programming eliminates the need for OOP design patterns? If so, could you post or link to an example of a typical OOP design pattern and its functional equivalent?