Passing cin values from a function to the main function
Returning multiple values from a C++ function
Functions vs. patterns In this MWE, I want to obtain bold letter for the letter "H" (compare the two "H") :  \documentclass[10 pt]{beamer} \usetheme{default} \usepackage{lmodern} % load a font with all the characters \usepackage{fontspec} \usepackage{cmbright} \SetSymbolFont{largesymbols}{normal}{OMX}{iwona}{m}{n} \usepackage{amsmath}%loads amsmath that should go before unicode-math \usefonttheme{professionalfonts} \defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text}  % This seems to be important for mapping glyphs properly  \begin{document} \begin{frame} \[ \mbox{First bold H : }\|x\|_{\mathbf{H}},\; \mbox{Second bold H : }\mathbf{H}  \] \end{frame} \end{document}   but I don't know how doing it. THe "H" produced by this MWE is tiny but no bold effect. If I use      \SetSymbolFont{largesymbols}{normal}{OMX}{iwona}{m}{n}   I obtain bold tiny "H" but the font used still not the same. How to calculate the costs of a weapon enchantment? Bibliography contents (Journal names) not abbreviated even with IEEEabrv I am using the following syntax, with no errors or warnings. However, the journal names are still not abbreviated. I compiled the file numerous times, as well as the bibliography. Everything compiles with no errors.  The syntax:   \bibliographystyle{IEEEtran} \bibliography{IEEEabrv,references}   Additional info: I am using BibDesk and TeXStudio on a macbook.  Do you have any idea what might be the issue? and how to solve it? Thank you.  Edit:  Example entry from the IEEEabrv file:  @STRING{IEEE\_M\_COM        = "{IEEE} Commun. Mag."}   Example entry from my references file:  @article{dai:2015,     Author = {Test, T.},     Journal = {IEEE\_M\_COM },     Month = {September}     } How to check if a number is a power of 2 Today I needed a simple algorithm for checking if a number is a power of 2.  The algorithm needs to be:   Simple Correct for any ulong value.   I came up with this simple algorithm:  private bool IsPowerOfTwo(ulong number) {     if (number == 0)         return false;      for (ulong power = 1; power &gt; 0; power = power &lt;&lt; 1)     {         // This for loop used shifting for powers of 2, meaning         // that the value will become 0 after the last shift         // (from binary 1000...0000 to 0000...0000) then, the 'for'         // loop will break out.          if (power == number)             return true;         if (power &gt; number)             return false;     }     return false; }   But then I thought, how about checking if log2 x is an exactly round number? But when I checked for 2^63+1, Math.Log returned exactly 63 because of rounding. So I checked if 2 to the power 63 is equal to the original number - and it is, because the calculation is done in doubles and not in exact numbers:  private bool IsPowerOfTwo_2(ulong number) {     double log = Math.Log(number, 2);     double pow = Math.Pow(2, Math.Round(log));     return pow == number; }   This returned true for the given wrong value: 9223372036854775809.  Is there a better algorithm? Partial Sums of Geometric Series How can I render bokeh circles?  Nothing I do seems to work.   I tried using an empty as the focus point for a cube, with some point lamps in the background with about 2000 strength, but it doesn't work. It just makes everything blurry.  I also raised the blades to 4/5/6/12, and it doesn't make a difference.  I'm using Blender 2.74. In my , I provided the following, problematic,  wording (especially bold italic), and I need help to better understand this issue so I can fix my answer:1          The thing is the books. (Reduced form of Sentence 2.a)         Fundamentally, Sentence 2.a (the so-called "correct" answer), is grammatically defective. Recall there is another grammatical rule: the subject and subject's complement should match in number.    A clarification is needed here. I am not suggesting here, in this EL&amp;U question, that there is any such singular grammatical rule as indicated in the quote above.  The quote continues as follows:     The reduced sentence makes the disagreement between the subject's and complement's plurality obvious. What is one to do? Language is linear and we know "The thing is X" is better than "The thing are X", so we go with the former, which is the subject-verb agreement rule. But what is "the books" then? It must be thought of as a collective noun, even if it doesn't look or feel like one. Forcing something to be a collective noun is related to the idea of notional agreement.   Others noted that grammatically defective is too strongly worded.  There is no such "grammatical rule" for subject/complement agreement.  Please help me understand/improve upon my line of thought here.  I'm stating that Sentence 2.1 presents a fundamental "conflict" or "error" (however one might define error) at some level (morphological, syntax, grammatical, semantic):     The thing is the books.  (Or, "The thing is the objects.")   Based on the "obvious" morphosyntactic plurality conflict, the above sentence feels so wrong that I think many native speakers would think it "simply" grammatically incorrect. However, @F.E. gives counter examples:     And here are some more grammatical examples, where the number of subject and predicative complement don't agree: "They were a problem to us all", "That so-called work of art is simply four pieces of driftwood glued together" (CGEL, page 254-5). As CGEL says: "What is required is semantic compatibility, not syntactic agreement . . .". There are more examples on page 512: "The only thing we need now is some new curtains", "The major asset of the team is its world-class opening bowlers", "Our neighbors are a nuisance", "This gadget is five different tools in one".   I think all the examples given above can be explained as notional agreement.    Question 1: If we explain this phenomena in terms of notional vs syntactic agreement, where does "grammatically correct/incorrect" fit in?  Question 2: Can a simple sentence such as "The thing is the objects." be grammatically incorrect while more complex sentences such as "The thing is four pieces of driftwood glued together." be grammatically correct?  (The answer, in my mind, must be no; this is my conundrum.)  Question 3: Would it be better to say that Sentence 2.a has a low level of (linguistic) ?   Question 4: How about a low level of  and that it's semantically difficult to be (linguistically) ?    Question 5: Do we simply draw a hard line and say "The thing is the objects." is 100% grammatically correct?  I didn't particularly like this option based on intuitive notions of "grammatically correct".    1. Please help me and be kind; I'm trying to improve my understanding. I'm looking for cool, objective advice on how to look at this.  I numbered my questions so they can be easily referenced, if desired.  My preference is the final answer would sufficiently answer all the questions, but of course that can be done explicitly or implicitly. When two phrases are pronounced alike but have different spelling and meaning, can we call them homophones?  e.g. "ice-cream" and "I scream", "nitrate" and "night rate", "that's tough" and "that stuff".  Or is there another term for them?  What linguistic phenomenon distiguishes these near homophones?  I've checked the putative duplicate at  but it isn't exactly what I'm asking here. Zooming in to a selection of vertices with the period key does not work as expected I am following through the exercises in BlenderBasics_4thEdition2011.pdf and have gotten to the section on texturing.  The book goes through the creation of a Lighthouse and now I am texturing it.  I want to have a closeup view of the roof of the lighthouse after partitioning it as the lesson describes on page 54.    In order to get a close up view I selected the roof and want to center the screen on the vertices of it so I pressed the Numpad . key.  When I do that the view zooms so that the roof is off the screen.    What am I am doing wrong?    I tried Ray's answer and was able to move the origin but pressing the Numpad . key still did not work.  The centering was still on the bottom of the lighthouse, as if the origin was still there. How do you iterate backwards through an STL list? The usual Schrodinger Lagrangian is $$ \tag 1 i(\psi^{*}\partial_{t}\psi ) + \frac{1}{2m} \psi^{*}(\nabla^2)\psi, $$ which gives the correct equations of motion, with conjugate momentum for $\psi^{*}$ vanishing. This Lagrangian density is not real but differs from a real Lagrangian density  $$ \tag 2 \frac{i}{2}(\psi^{*}\partial_{t}\psi -\psi \partial_{t}\psi^{*} ) + \frac{1}{2m} \psi^{*}(\nabla^2)\psi $$ by a total derivative.  My trouble is that these two lagrangian densities lead to different conjugate momenta and hence when setting equal time commutation relations, I am getting different results (a factor of 2 is causing the problem). I can rescale the fields but then my Hamiltonian also changes. Then applying Heisenberg equation of motion, I don't get the operator Schrodinger equation.   Is it possible to work with the real Lagrangian density and somehow get the correct commutation relations? I would have expected two Lagrangians differing by total derivative terms to give identical commutation relations (since canonical transformations preserve them). But perhaps I am making some very simple error. Unless all conjugate momenta are equivalent for two Lagrangians differing by total derivatives, how does one choose the correct one?   I guess the same thing happens for other first order systems like Dirac Lagrangian also. How can I contribute to Ubuntu? I would like to know what kinds of contributions someone can make to Ubuntu. Such as Programmer, User, Proofreader, etc. What is the name of the genre of games similar to Jetpack Joyride? Can I make a script always execute as root? Is it OK for OSB3 boards to get wet during construction? Changing permissions on serial port I'm using the Arduino IDE in Ubuntu, and am having issues with the serial port. It has worked in the past, but for reasons that may be unnecesary, I felt the need to change the ownership of some of the files from root ownership to my users ownership.  This made the IDE work correctly, but I lost the ability to use the correct serial port.  In the dev folder, the port I need is listed as permission 166. Someone (who is no longer in the area to help me) swapped the permissions to 666, which made it all work gloriously.  However, it reverted back as soon as I restarted my computer, and if I now try to use the command:  sudo chmod 666 ttyACM0   nothing happens. No error messages, but no permission change either.    How can I change it, and how can I get it to change permanently.  I apologize if this question is overly simplistic or unclear, I'm an ubuntu noob, and I wouldn't begrudge feedback! Canonical has recently announced , which is Ubuntu with a specific interface for mobile devices.  Where can I get phones with this version of Ubuntu pre-installed? If no devices are available yet, where can I pre-order one? On my fully updated Ubuntu 18.04.3 system, audio doesn't work unless I switch between outputs. When I boot my PC, the right output (stereo speakers) is already selected by default, but there is no audio from Chromium, Firefox, VLC or any other program. However, the GNOME speakers test works. I can hear "front left" and "front right" from there, but no audio from other programs. In order to fix that, I can simply switch to another audio output (e.g. HDMI out) and then switch back to the stereo speakers, and the audio will magically work. Any idea why? It's not a big deal because it takes a couple of seconds to switch between outputs, but it's kind of annoying to do that after every reboot. Extra }, or forgotten \right My MWE:  \documentclass{report}  \usepackage{amsmath}  \begin{document}  \begin{align} y &amp;= a \\ =&amp; -2c_1\bar{z}_1^2 + 2\bar{z}_1\bar{z}_2 + 2\bar{z}_2 \left ( -\bar{z}_1 -c_2z_2 - \frac{3\epsilon}{2}\bar{z}_2 -\sigma_{2,1}\cos(x_1)\Delta x_1 \notag \right. \\ \left. &amp;- \sigma_{2,2}\Delta x_2 -\sigma_{2,3} \Delta u +c_2 \chi_2 \vphantom{\frac{1}{1}} \right ) - 2\gamma \sigma_{2,1}^2\cos^2(x_1) \Delta x_1^2 - \gamma \sigma_{2,2}^2 \Delta x_2^2   - 2\gamma \sigma_{2,3}^2 \Delta u^2 \end{align}  \end{document}   The error I get:  Extra }, or forgotten \right.   The expected result: