Dry white wine substitute for slow cooker garlic chicken recipe
What is a substitute for red or white wine in a recipe?
That's basically the question, is there a "right" way to implement operator&lt;&lt; ? Reading  I can see that something like:  friend bool operator&lt;&lt;(obj const&amp; lhs, obj const&amp; rhs);   is preferred to something like   ostream&amp; operator&lt;&lt;(obj const&amp; rhs);   But I can't quite see why should I use one or the other.  My personal case is:  friend ostream &amp; operator&lt;&lt;(ostream &amp;os, const Paragraph&amp; p) {     return os &lt;&lt; p.to_str(); }   But I could probably do:  ostream &amp; operator&lt;&lt;(ostream &amp;os) {     return os &lt;&lt; paragraph; }   What rationale should I base this decision on?  Note:   Paragraph::to_str = (return paragraph)    where paragraph's a string. I used to deploy metadata using ant migration tool successfully but from last night I am getting the below error:  John@John:~/mm_workspace/TEST_Project/deploy$ ant deployUnpackaged  Buildfile: /home/john/mm_workspace/TEST_Project/deploy/build.xml  deployUnpackaged:  BUILD FAILED /home/john/mm_workspace/TEST_Project/deploy/build.xml:72: Failed to submit request to https://cs19.salesforce.com/services/Soap/m/35.0/00D293456000Qaf for user john@test.com.dev. Error: {http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/}Client - Maximum size of request reached. Maximum size of request is 52428800 bytes.  Total time: 2 minutes 10 seconds   I think this is because of too much metadata that I am trying to deploy. For now, I am deploying classes and then VF pages and so on but I am looking for an option to deploy everything in one go without running into the above error.  I am sure that people are working on more complex projects than mine with lots of metadata and I am wondering how are they deploying with out hitting this error?  Thanks Merging/Joining GeoJSON and JSON? At the beginning of my document, I have created a counter using \newcounter. Over the course of the document, this counter is increases using \stepcounter. How can I display the final value of the counter in a place prior to the the final occurrence of \stepcounter, such as at the beginning of the document? iOS 7 Weather app expand/collapse transition Number of subrings of a Field how to launch Bluez on Lubuntu Trying to launch a BT adapter/manager(default installed on Lubu)a little window informs me that it cannot because there's no Bluez launched.  In terminal: sudo apt install bluez, it answers: Bluez is already the new version (5.46-0ubuntu3) Then invites me to remove a couple of obsolete packages.  So where's Bluez Daemon to launch?  Writing:systemctl status bluetooth.service ; hcitool dev  Answer:   bluetooth.service - Bluetooth service    Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/bluetooth.service; enabled; vendor preset    Active: inactive (dead)      Docs: man:bluetoothd(8)   Command:lspci -k | grep -A3 -i "wireless\|network\|bluetooth" Answer: 04:00.0 Ethernet controller: Qualcomm Atheros AR242x / AR542x Wireless Network Adapter (PCI-Express) (rev 01)     Subsystem: Quanta Microsystems, Inc AR242x / AR542x Wireless Network Adapter (PCI-Express)     Kernel driver in use: ath5k     Kernel modules: ath5k 0f:06.0 CardBus bridge: Texas Instruments PCIxx12 Cardbus Controller oem@oem-Extensa-5220:~$ Proof of "the continuous image of a connected set is connected" None of the existing questions is exactly answering my question so I'm posting a new question, but feel free to refer me to some already answered question!   In Rudin Theorem 4.22, we know that      If $f$ is a continuous mapping of a metric space $X$ into a metric space $Y$, and $E$ is a connected subset of $X$, then $f(E)$ is connected.    In the proof, we started with consider $f(E) = A \cup B$, where $A$ and $B$ are nonempty separated subsets. Then put $G = E \cap f^{-1}(A)$ and $H = E \cap f^{-1}(B)$. Then Rudin is claiming that $E = G \cup H$. I'm a little suspicious about this. What if $f$ is non-surjective, then $f^{-1}(A) \cup f^{-1}(B)$  is only a proper subset of $E$? Is there a property of $f$ being continuous that forces $f$ to be 1-1? Is it true that: $a+bi$ is prime in $\mathbb{Z}[i]$ if and only if $a^2+b^2$ is prime in $\mathbb{Z}$ Do we need a global test before post hoc tests? QGIS 2.0 - can't select items in Print Composer Sending and Parsing JSON Objects in Android Is the phrase "it's just a matter of semantics" meaningless? I hear this phrase from time to time, and I really don't know what it means.  Two people are debating, and one says "the difference between your position and mine is just a matter of semantics."   This would seem to me to be quite an important difference.  That is, if one person means one thing, and the other person means something else, then they really do have different positions.  If they said "it is just a matter of terminology" or "just a matter of phrasing" I would get it.  But if someone says "we differ only what we mean" ... it kinda makes me chuckle because it seems to be saying that their meaning is not important, as if the argument was primary and the positions they take a secondary consideration.  So I started looking around for examples of this. I guess it seems that there is a popular notion that semantics is about very fine distinctions, such as:   Another interpretation seems to be that semantics is the difference between two ways of saying the same thing:   Maybe it is just a way of stopping an annoying conversation:   And then there is some usage that I simply don't understand:    And also:   Still, to me it is just a meaningless phrase.  Am I missing an important meaning here? How do I edit a file in /proc that can be viewed with cat, but is not editable by mousepad and abiword? Does a preprint include revisions made in response to peer review? This is related to but not answered in .  After an author has submitted a manuscript to a journal for peer-review, very often the journal asks the author to revise (and resubmit) the manuscript as a precondition for its publication. I am wondering whether the term preprint refers to the manuscript before or after its authors made these revisions.  If a preprint includes revisions made in response to peer review, then there is only a slight difference, mostly regarding layout and style, between the preprint and the article that is published in the journal. From a reader’s perspective, there would be no point in paying for access to the article, since they can simply download the preprint free of charge. A publisher would probably want to prevent their authors (by publication agreements etc.) from publishing preprints that differ from the respective journal article only in form.  As a side question, what kind of preprints do publishers tolerate, as a rule? Computational complexity of Fibonacci Sequence Should a toggle button show its current state or the state to which it will change? I have a quick question about buttons that toggle between two states. (Think Play/Pause, or Shuffle/Regular Play.) As the title says, should the toggle show it's current state or the state to which it will transition?  I think people are used to the Play/Pause convention. But the Shuffle/Regular play might be more confusing if you show the transition state instead of current. For example, the built-in music player on the Xbox 360 does it this way: when it's in shuffle mode, it shows the icon for direct play and vice versa and it always confuses me (am I in shuffle mode or straight play).  I see it this way: Play/Pause is more like action as in begin playing or pause playing. Yes behind the scenes it is a state transition but to the user, there is an action. Whereas Shuffle/Straight Play is an option and it's best to show the current state (and possibly have only one icon and change button to show that the option is enabled/disabled). Thoughts? Yesterday, Asaf Karagila's  sparked an extensive discussion on ways of proving that all countable ordinals are embeddable in $\Bbb Q$, and whether particular solutions to this use the Axiom of Choice.  Since the arguments used to prove this can be shady on their use of Choice when formulated tersely, fully fleshed out answers are appreciated.  To be concrete, this question asks for proofs of the following fact:     All countable ordinals $\alpha &lt; \omega_1$ are order-embeddable in the rationals $\Bbb Q$.   Especially answers avoiding the Axiom of Choice are appreciated.    Of relevance and related interest is  (but it's not a duplicate, since that question asks for explicit embeddings). Is the empty set a subset of itself? durbinWatsonTest() in R for non time-series data I am trying to understand whether the Durbin-Watson test is meaningful at all when applied to regression data that have no temporal order (eg. blood pressure ~ bodyMassIndex + exercise).   I would say no, as the autocorrelation should obviously vary with the order of the subjects (which is random), but I wonder whether the durbinWatsonTest in R involves a bootstrapping of the data, where order of the bootstrapping data is shuffled each time, and then perhaps an average autocorrelation is computed over the bootstrapping samples (but then again, shouldn't this average autocorrelation be zero for randomly sampled data?).  On the other hand, the value of the statistics seems to be quite stable over multiple runs of the function, so I am even more confused...  I came across it in Andy Field's book "Discovering Statistics with R", where it is used is an example with non-time series data, although in another, more recent book of the same author ("Adventures in Statistics") it does say that the test is applicable only to time series data.