Using Getters and Setters
Are getters and setters poor design? Contradictory advice seen
I have a large file and I would like print from each sequential 50 lines , the 15th and 25th lines.  sed -n '15,25p' inputfile   How to modify this command to print only lines 15 and 25 and to loop over each 50 lines in the file. I tried Office 2013, but now wish to uninstall it. I tried to uninstall it but it always hangs at step  2 out of 4. It uses no CPU and no disk activity. So basically it's just idle.   Does anyone have a solution to this problem? Matrices A+B=AB implies A commutes with B I just installed Ubuntu 12.10 (amd64), and want to install a recent version of MySQL 5.6.  If possible, I would like to install (not upgrade) it the "Debian Way' (i.e., using apt-get or dpkg). Repeat String - Javascript Can we have a way to access Area 51 on the iOS and android app?  More sites would flourish due to more traffic. Can I travel after visa's intended travel date? I just finished applying for my visa and had originally planned to travel on the 30th of September, so I put that as my intended date of travel. But now I will not be leaving until close to the second week of October.  How does this work, will I still be able to travel with this visa even though it says I intended to arrive on September 30th? I recall Asimov had a character who was The autoc of , clearly based on the word “autokrat” but I don’t recall the exact spelling.  This stumped Google, which would rather correct the spelling to some other word than find a unique word.  In the story, he had gone undercover and the reader did not know either that some other character was in fact the Autoc, until it had been revealed to the main character. apt-get remove with wildcard removed way more than expected. why? Let $X$ be a space that satisfies the hypotheses used to construct a universal cover $\overline{X}$. Let $\pi = \pi_1(X)$ and consider the action of the group $\pi$ on the space $\overline{X}$ given by the isomorphism of $\pi$ with $\text{Aut}(\overline{X})$. Let $A$ be an abelian group and let $\mathbb{Z}[\pi]$ act trivially on $A$, $a \cdot \sigma = a$ for $\sigma \in \pi$ and $a \in A$.  Now, assume that $X$ is a CW complex. How do I see that $\overline{X}$ is a CW complex such that the action of $\pi$ on $\overline{X}$ induces an action of the group ring $\mathbb{Z}[\pi]$ on the cellular chain complex $C_*(\overline{X})$ such that each $C_q(\overline{X})$ is a free $\mathbb{Z}[\pi]$-module and$$C_*(X; A) \cong A \otimes_{\mathbb{Z}[\pi]} C_*(\overline{X})?$$ What's going on with "compact implies sequentially compact"? I've seen both counterexamples and proofs to &quot;compact implies sequentially compact&quot;, and I'm not sure what's going on. Apparently there are compact spaces which are not sequentially compact; quick googling and wikipedia checks will turn up examples floating around; they tend to be variants of $[0,1]^{[0,1]}$ with the product topology.  Here's a demonstration(?):  $[0,1]^{[0,1]}$ is compact by Tychonoff's theorem.  So, we demonstrate failure of sequential compactness. Choose a unique binary representation for each $x\in [0,1]$. For each $n\in\mathbb{N}$, let $f_n : [0,1]\to[0,1]$ (an element of $[0,1]^{[0,1]}$) be the function which maps each $x$ to its $n$-th place digit in its binary expansion. Let $f_{n_k}$ be a subsequence of this sequence. Let $x'\in [0,1]$ be such that the $n_{2m}$-th digit is $0$ and the $n_{2m+1}$-th digit is $1$, for all $m\in\mathbb{N}$. Then $f_{n_k} (x')$ does not converge (it alternates between $0$ and $1$), and hence $f_{n_k}$ cannot converge. Thus we have found a sequence in $[0,1]^{[0,1]}$ without any convergent subsequence and so it is not sequentially compact.  (Aside: this is apparently based off of an example in Steen's Counterexamples in Topology, according to  ) Nevertheless, there's also some proofs(?) floating around that compactness of a space implies sequential compactness, along these lines (this proof(?) is of the contrapositive):  Suppose $X$ is not sequentially compact. By definition, this means there is some sequence $(x_n)$ over $X$ with no convergent subsequence. If any $x\in X$ had for each of its neighborhood $U$ infinitely many $n$ for which $x_n \in U$, then we could define a convergent subsequence of $(x_n)$, contradicting our assumption.  (Presumably this is done by choosing for each neighborhood a sufficiently-large-indexed term in that neighborhood.) Thus, for each $x \in X$ we can select an open set $U_x$ such that $x\in U_x$ but with $x_n \in U_x$ for only finitely many $n$. The collection $\mathcal{U}=\{U_x : x\in X\}$ is clearly an open cover of $X$. If $\mathcal{U}$ had a finite subcover $\{U_1, \dots, U_k\}$ then the union $U_1 \cup \cdots \cup U_k$ would contain all of $X$ but only contain $x_n$ for finitely many $n$, which is impossible. Thus $X$ is not compact, since we have found an open cover without a finite subcover.  (Aside: this proof is essentially the same as the proof appearing in Rudin's Principles of Mathematical Analysis for Thm 2.37 that infinite subsets of compact spaces have limit points.) So, what's going on here?  It can't be that what both the counterexample and the proof are telling us is correct.  Is there some subtle (or more embarassingly for me -- glaring) flaw in the proof? If I inherit from a base class and want to pass something from the constructor of the inherited class to the constructor of the base class, how do I do that?  For example, if I inherit from the Exception class I want to do something like this:  class MyExceptionClass : Exception {      public MyExceptionClass(string message, string extraInfo)      {          //This is where it's all falling apart          base(message);      } }   Basically what I want is to be able to pass the string message to the base Exception class. I always thought of current as the time derivative of charge, $\frac{dq}{dt}$. However, I found out recently that it is the ampere that is the base unit and not the coulomb. Why is this? It seems to me that charge can exist without current, but current cannot exist without charge. So the logical choice for a base unit would be the coulomb. Right? The 's  feature (E:RftLW, p. 58; WGtE, p. 180) states:     [...] You ignore all class, race, spell, and level requirements on attuning to or using magic items.   Class and race requirements are relatively intuitive, additionally, since an Artificer is able to cast spells they can already attune to items that require you to be a spellcaster. But there's still some questions:   Can they use a spell scroll of a spell not on their spell list? Is this one of the four requirements ignored? What are level and spell requirements; what are some examples? $\infty = -1 $ paradox Showing $\sum_{i = 1}^n\frac1{i(i+1)} = 1-\frac1{n+1}$ without induction? I oversaw a high-school mathematics test the other day, and one of the problems was the following     Show, using induction or other means, that $$\sum_{i = 1}^n\frac1{i(i+1)} = 1-\frac1{n+1}$$   The induction proof is very standard, where the induction step relies on the fact that $\frac{1}{n+1} + \frac{1}{n(n+1)} = \frac{1}{n}$, and I'm sure it's been answered on this site before. However, I got intrigued by the "or other means" part of the question.  I don't know whether the teacher who wrote the test even considered any alternative solutions (he may just have written it so that if anyone has a crazy idea that works out, then they should get a full score for it), but I tried to find one. For instance, we may do the following telescope-ish argument: $$ \frac{1}{1(1+1)} + \frac{1}{2(2+1)} + \cdots + \frac{1}{(n-1)n} + \frac{1}{n(n+1)} + \frac{1}{n+1}\\ = \frac{1}{1(1+1)} + \frac{1}{2(2+1)} + \cdots + \frac{1}{(n-1)n} + \frac1n\\ \vdots\\ = \frac{1}{1(1+1)} + \frac12\\ = 1 $$ However, I feel that this is just an induction proof in disguise (hidden in the vertical dots). If one uses the mechanics of the induction proof to check whether the formula is true for a specific $n$, then one certainly does the exact same calculations as I have done here.  Is there a proof of this fact that clearly does not use induction (or at least hides it better)? The more elementary the better, and the ultimate goal would be to do it within the syllabus of the students taking the test (or at least not far from it). For reference, they should be familiar with the summation formula of arithmetic and geometric series and their derivations (so techniques resembling those would be well within specifications).  If there is a solution using calculus, then the students should be able to integrate elementary trigonometric functions, as well as exponential functions, logarithms and rational functions. They are familiar with integration by parts, substitution and partial fractions.  I welcome more advanced solutions as well, of course. Books for particle physics and the Standard Model Flagging summary improvement: filters Here is my flagging summary on SU:   Your flagging history   32 posts flagged as requiring moderator attention    2 are waiting for review   3 were marked valid   1 were marked invalid   (older flags were not recorded valid/invalid)    2 posts marked as spam    It is too complicated to look for invalid flags. Would it be possible to make filters on the top of the page (like on favorites for example) with:  By date, By type (off-topic, spam, dupes), By status (accepted, pending, rejected)  It would make it easier for reviewers to check their flagging and eventually know what to improve on.  Or is there another easy way to audit this? Suppose $X$ and $Y$ are independent positive random variables with probability density functions $f_X$ and $f_Y$ respectively. Show that $Z=X/Y$ is absolutely continuous and find its probability density function.   $\textbf{My Thought:}$ In order to show that $Z$ is absolutely continuous, I need to show that it has a commulative distribution function. Then I can also differentiate the latter to obtain the probability density function of $Z$. I have the following calculation \begin{align*} P(X/Y\leq z)&amp;=P(X\ge zY,Y&lt;0)+P(X\le zY,Y&gt;0)\\ &amp;=\int_{-\infty}^{0}\left(\int_{yz}^{\infty}f_{X}(x)dx\right)f_{Y}(y)dy+\int_{0}^{\infty}\left(\int_{-\infty}^{yz}f_{X}(x)dx\right)f_{Y}(y)dy\\ &amp;=\int_{0}^{\infty}\left(\int_{0}^{yz}f_{X}(x)dx\right)f_{Y}(y)dy. \end{align*} Also, if $z&lt;0$, then we have that $F_Z(z)=0,$ since $X,Y$ are positive random variables. Therefore the random variable $Z$ is continuous, and we can differentiate it to obtain the probability distribution function of $Z$. We have that $f_Z(z)=0$ if $z\leq 0,$ and otherwise we have $$f_Z(z)=\int_{0}^{\infty}yf_{X}(yz)f_Y(y)dy.$$    Is my reasoning above correct?  Any feedback is much appreciated.  Thank you for your time. How can one link / merge / combine / associate two accounts / users? (Anonymous / unregistered / cookie, or Google / Facebook / registered) I accidentally posted a question without being logged in. Is there a way to associate that question with my account?   For more information, visit &quot;&quot; in the .   a.k.a. How can you link a registered account to a cookie-based account? a.k.a. How do I merge an unregistered account with a registered account a.k.a. Merging users a.k.a. How do I associate anonymous questions I’ve asked with my registered account? a.k.a. Is there a way to claim an unregistered user? (in case anyone searches with those terms)