In most Bourne-shell derivatives, multiple-word variables such as var="foo bar" are split into words when passed to a command or used in a for foo in $var loop. By default, zsh does not have that behaviour: the variable remains intact. (This is not a bug! See below.) The option SH_WORD_SPLIT exists to provide compatibility. For example, defining the function args to show the number of its arguments: args() { echo $#; } and with our definition of 'var', args $var produces the output '1'.

This is a slightly unexpected effect of the option MULTIOS, which is set by default. Let's look more closely: foo 2>&1 >foo.out | bar What you're probably expecting is that the command foo sends its standard output to the pipe and so to the input of the command bar, while it sends its standard error to the file foo.out. What you actually see is that the output is going both to the pipe and into the file.

No. See here for an explanation of the reasons for this. It is however possible to distinguish between genuine proper and improper lists, e.g. (define-syntax foo (syntax-rules () ((foo (x ...)) 1) ((foo (x . y)) 2))) (foo (1 2 3)) ;=> 1 (foo (1 . (2 3))) ;=> 1 (foo (1 . 2)) ;=> 2

Because that doesn't create a Foo object - it declares a non-member function that returns a Foo object. First, here's a better explanation of the problem. Suppose there is a class called Bar that has a default ctor. This might even be a library class such as std::string, but for now we'll just call it Bar: Now suppose there's another class called Foo that has a ctor that takes a Bar. As before, this might be defined by someone other than you.

Especially for hierarchical indexes sometimes the result is not as expected due to special characters appearing in the keyword. In the following example the word 'card' should appear before '-eyed' since the hyphen should not count as an ordinary character by means of sorting. This is especially problematic if the list of words on the second level is very long.

Since the SoaringPilot is entirely developed by volunteers in their spare time features will be added as time allows. If you send the changes to help@soaringpilot.org they might be included in the next release.

This is really a question about Comma's ''shortcut'' syntax, which defines a mapping between method calls and the elements of a given container. There is a section on the shortcut syntax in the guide that goes into more detail, but here is a quick list of the seven possible ways a shortcut can can be resolved.

URGENT - DROP EVERYTHING AND READ THIS! The race starts in 5 hours so I need a tide chart for Mumble Foo Bar NOW!

You can get them easier than I can by checking the sources described in the section entitled What to do if your location isn't listed.

The use of dots in function application is not part of the R5RS grammar but, like most error situations, Schemes are allowed to do whatever they like when encountering such a construct, including interpreting it as (apply foo bar baz). No known Schemes do this and in any case such code would not be portable. Note, however, that most Schemes expand literal lists occurring in function applications, e.g. (foo bar . (1 2 3)) is expanded into (foo bar 1 2 3) by the reader.

The use of VaR for non-financial firms is still evolving. Currently it is mostly focused on either VaR for derivatives and hedging instruments only or VaR for cash flows, i.e., EaR.

You should read this as "Quartz, variety Amethyst". The mineral is quartz and that is how all my minerals are listed, by the accepted mineral name. The varietal name is amethyst so that is listed afterwards. Other common varieties of quartz are smoky, citrine, morion, Herkimer Diamond. But they are all composed of quartz. Other minerals have varieties too. Kunzite, hiddenite, emerald, aquamarine, ruby, sapphire are all common varietal names for various minerals.

I think of Value at Risk as a measure of potential loss from an unlikely, adverse event in a normal, everyday market environment. VaR is denominated in units of a currency, e.g., US dollars. To get more concrete, VaR is an amount, say D dollars, where the chance of losing more than D dollars is, say, 1 in 100 over some future time interval, say 1 day. This is a probabilistic statement, and therefore VaR is a statistical measure of risk exposure.

The command command foo does just that. You don't need this with aliases, but you do with functions. Note that error messages like zsh: job table full or recursion limit exceeded are a good sign that you tried calling 'foo' in function 'foo' without using 'command'. If foo is a builtin rather than an external command, use builtin foo instead.

This is probably caused by a growing package cache. Check the size of /var/cache/pacman and use pacman -Sc to delete all cached packages if you need to. You may also just delete files manually, there is no index file or anything fancy that could be corrupted (so far). In the same way, you can remove the source packages downloaded by makepkg with makepkg -C. Use the purge option of pacman to get rid of these files, too. It is called ''nosave'', and prevents the creation of config file backups.

Just about every VaR model assumes that the portfolio under consideration doesn't change over the forecast horizon. This is a fiction, especially for trading portfolios, but trying to incorporate forecasts of position changes into a model forecasting returns is very complicated. VaR models also assume that the historical data used to construct the VaR estimate contains information useful in forecasting the loss distribution.

Excellent question. A precise answer isn't possible yet. This is troublesome, as one hopes that it is being used in ways that are consistent with the concept of shareholder wealth maximization, but we can't be sure.

Now you're getting pedantic. I said it was well-defined; I didn't say it was intuitive. How often do you get documents from that base URI? That's not really a frequently asked question. The answer is mailto:foo/bar, by @@recent interpretation of RFC2396. Implementation experience is not completely consistent. weasle words about how it's useful to eventually get this nailed down, i.e. developing a URI test suite, but the bugs aren't costing us much in the mean time.]