Dev Stack Source

Answer : Some notes: You'd need an editor which could work with geo coordinates instead of simple X,Y ones. Or you would need to reproject coordinates when converting. Converting from KML to SVG would mean potentially losing KML-specific information which is not stored by the SVG format. Converting from SVG to KML would mean potentially losing SVG styling and other features not covered in KML. GIMP is not a vector graphics editor (AFAIK), you probably mean Inkscape. Other than that, there are quite a few tools which claim to do what you're looking for. Simple as in SVG to KML and KML to SVG? This tool converts Google Earth files(kml and kmz) into vectorial SVG files, usable in Inkscape, Illustrator and other software. kml2svg.free.fr converts most of the elements that contains a GE document: folders placemarks (points, lines, polygones, multigeometries and embeded images) tours Sketchup resources (depending of the resources..) using the desired earth projection: Mercator, Mi...

Answer : For those who Use ImageView or TextView or EditText Scale works perfectly. Use android:scaleX="-1" //To flip horizontally or android:scaleY="-1" //To flip vertically OR Try android:rotationX="180" // for horizontal android:rotationY="180" // for vertical OR Simply rotation="180" for vertical android:rotation="180" // for vertical Edit: Additional If you want to flip/mirror icons/drawable when changing language RTL/LTR ("Right To Left"/"Left To Right"), there is a nice way of doing so in android vector drawable just check the ckeckbox Enable auto mirroring for RTL layout . => Right Click on drawable folder => New => Vector Asset => Select drawable => check the Checkbox . I am using AndroidStudio 3.0.1 in Windows 10 . well, there is no need to create another vector image, you can do it with one single vector image just make sure you do the following st...

Answer : Implementation 1 returns the magnitude of the vector that would result from a regular 3D cross product of the input vectors, taking their Z values implicitly as 0 (i.e. treating the 2D space as a plane in the 3D space). The 3D cross product will be perpendicular to that plane, and thus have 0 X & Y components (thus the scalar returned is the Z value of the 3D cross product vector). Note that the magnitude of the vector resulting from 3D cross product is also equal to the area of the parallelogram between the two vectors, which gives Implementation 1 another purpose. In addition, this area is signed and can be used to determine whether rotating from V1 to V2 moves in an counter clockwise or clockwise direction. It should also be noted that implementation 1 is the determinant of the 2x2 matrix built from these two vectors. Implementation 2 returns a vector perpendicular to the input vector still in the same 2D plane. Not a cross product in the classical sense but c...

Answer : How about std::remove() instead: #include <algorithm> ... vec.erase(std::remove(vec.begin(), vec.end(), 8), vec.end()); This combination is also known as the erase-remove idiom. You can use std::find to get an iterator to a value: #include <algorithm> std::vector<int>::iterator position = std::find(myVector.begin(), myVector.end(), 8); if (position != myVector.end()) // == myVector.end() means the element was not found myVector.erase(position); You can not do that directly. You need to use std::remove algorithm to move the element to be erased to the end of the vector and then use erase function. Something like: myVector.erase(std::remove(myVector.begin(), myVector.end(), 8), myVec.end()); . See this erasing elements from vector for more details.

Answer : In general, I strongly prefer using a vector over an array for non-trivial work; however, there are some advantages of arrays: Arrays are slightly more compact: the size is implicit. Arrays are non-resizable; sometimes this is desirable. Arrays don't require parsing extra STL headers (compile time). It can be easier to interact with straight-C code with an array (e.g. if C is allocating and C++ is using). Fixed-size arrays can be embedded directly into a struct or object, which can improve memory locality and reducing the number of heap allocations needed. Because C++03 has no vector literals. Using arrays can sometime produce more succinct code. Compared to array initialization: char arr[4] = {'A', 'B', 'C', 'D'}; vector initialization can look somewhat verbose std::vector<char> v; v.push_back('A'); v.push_back('B'); ... I'd go for std::array available in C++0x instead of plain arrays which can...

Answer : Use the names function: whatyouwant <- as.character(dd$name) names(whatyouwant) <- dd$crit as.character is necessary, because data.frame and read.table turn characters into factors with default settings. If you want a one-liner: whatyouwant <- setNames(as.character(dd$name), dd$crit) You can also use deframe(x) from the tibble package for this. tibble::deframe() It converts the first column to names and second column to values. You can make a vector from dd$name , and add names using names() , but you can do it all in one step with structure() : whatiwant <- structure(as.character(dd$name), names = as.character(dd$crit))

Answer : Because the operation does not need to consume the vector¹, I think it should not consume it. That only leads to extra copying somewhere else in the program: use std::collections::HashSet; use std::iter::FromIterator; fn hashset(data: &[u8]) -> HashSet<u8> { HashSet::from_iter(data.iter().cloned()) } Call it like hashset(&v) where v is a Vec<u8> or other thing that coerces to a slice. There are of course more ways to write this, to be generic and all that, but this answer sticks to just introducing the thing I wanted to focus on. ¹This is based on that the element type u8 is Copy , i.e. it does not have ownership semantics. The following should work nicely; it fulfills your requirements: use std::collections::HashSet; use std::iter::FromIterator; fn vec_to_set(vec: Vec<u8>) -> HashSet<u8> { HashSet::from_iter(vec) } from_iter() works on types implementing IntoIterator , so a Vec argument is sufficient. Ad...