From Newsgroup: comp.lang.mumps
<div>I want to copy/paste in my tmux sessions like I was able to with El Capitan. I just installed MacOS Sierra and I no longer have this functionality. I didn't realize how often I utilized this capability until I lost it yesterday.</div><div></div><div></div><div>Bugger - I found a setting in iterm2 I was missing. What I noticed is that pbpaste was indeed working as expected, I just could not select text in a tmux session and have pbcopy work as expected.</div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div>super copy 2.2 beta download</div><div></div><div>DOWNLOAD 🆗
https://t.co/zXlRCVMm0R</div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div>Added options to sort the copy list. You can either click on the column headers or use the 'Sort' context menu item.</div><div></div><div>Complete rewrite of the copy interception system, adds support for Windows Vista, Seven and all 64 bit Windows. For now, compatibility with Windows 95, 98 and Millenium has been dropped and 'handled processes' is deactivated.</div><div></div><div></div><div>I ran across the following crash while using one of our apps.The app crashes since the recent iOS 17 beta builds.The code crashes when using valueForKey on an NSArray with objects that implement NSCopying.</div><div></div><div></div><div>I use this feature a lot for things like taking a screenshot of a textbook on my Mac to put in notes on my iPad instead of having to write it out by hand and it makes some sense that with an image it takes a bit to send it as images take up a lot of space but a lot of the time it errors out and when I try using it with text it also takes forever, and why does it show an annoying little pop up each time I copy something over from a diff device? that just interrupts the work flow and its so intrusive at least make it look like a focus (or copy paste) notification looks like</div><div></div><div></div><div>I am seeing very spiky upload speeds when syncing using Casper Admin and when copying files up to the Fileshare from my desktop so could this be to blame? I see speeds from max to a couple of kb then back to max every 3 or 4 seconds.</div><div></div><div></div><div>Other future development includes automatic sip by sip migration, which provides a way to incrementally copy objects to R2 as they get requested from an end-user. It allows you to start serving objects from R2 as they migrate, saving you money immediately.</div><div></div><div></div><div>With this capability you can copy your objects, previously scattered through one or even multiple buckets from other vendors, while ensuring that everything requested from the end-user side gets served from R2. And because you will only need to use the R2 Super Slurper to sip the object from elsewhere on the first request, you will start saving on those egress fees for any subsequent ones.</div><div></div><div></div><div>The parent Focused Technology RO1 proposes to develop universal, easy-to-use methods that will enable any super-resolution microscopy user to quantify the stoichiometry of proteins in super-resolution images. Super-resolution microscopy has revolutionized how we visualize the inner life of cells. Despite its impact, super-resolution microcopy currently suffers from important limitations. Specifically, counting proteins in super-resolution images is extremely challenging. The parent RO1 will develop and validate new methods to overcome this major challenge. As such, the project heavily relies on the use of specialized super-resolution microscopes capable of single molecule detection. Over the years we have tested several commercial super- resolution microscope systems and identified the Nanoimager from Oxford Nanoimaging (ONI) to have several favorable capabilities: easy-to-use user interface, compact footprint and mechanical stability that does not require the use of an optical table. We currently own an old, beta-version of the Nanoimager, which has several limitations typical of beta-testing systems. Importantly, the beta-version is not robust. Indeed, since its initial purchase, we had several instances of major failure putting the microscope out of commission for periods of more than 6 months. In addition, the Nanoimager is in heavy demand with 10 heavy users (>10 hours per week per user) and 3 medium users (5 hours per week per user). Importantly, super-resolution microscopy is a fast evolving field and since the development of the beta-system, ONI has drastically improved the robust operation of their microscope as well as added new hardware/software features for high throughput, automated imaging as well as 3D imaging capabilities, which are important for but currently not available to the parent RO1 project. Therefore, the parent RO1 is jeopardized by relying on an outdated, non-robust and heavily used microscope. Accordingly, we request funds to purchase the most up-to-date version of the Nanoimager to be used exclusively for parent RO1 projects.</div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div>This proposal will develop standardized methods and software that are easily accessible to non-expert users of single molecule super-resolution microscopy and that will empower them with quantitative tools to measure protein stoichiometry with nanoscale spatial resolution. We will develop methods based on calibration nanotemplates and the novel concept of benchmarking standards, which will enable quantification of copy number of small and large multi-protein complexes independently of experimental conditions. We will further implement an innovative, user-friendly, open-source, all-integrated software that incorporates all the steps needed to determine copy number distribution of proteins in super-resolution images.</div><div></div><div></div><div>Ok, I finally got to the bottom of it and I have a correction to my previous statement in that I had it backwards. The issue was not because that recent change broke anything but because that change was the right one (which fixes everything) and I had not yet merged it into the official copy of our Python libraries.</div><div></div><div></div><div>This article contains copyrighted music, files, or other copyrighted assets that can claim copyright infringement.</div><div></div><div></div><div></div><div>Reason: All the characters, except Boyfriend and Girlfriend, come from the Nintendo-owned Super Mario franchise.</div><div></div><div></div><div>The clone() method is supposed to return a copy of this object, however if I have three classes in an inheritance heirachy and call super.clone() three times, why doesn't the highest class in the inheritance heirachy, just under class Object, get a copy of that class returned?</div><div></div><div></div><div>Then calling super.clone() in class C, invokes clone() in B which calls super.clone(), invoke clone() in A which call super.clone() 'this time Object.clone() gets called'. Why is it not a copy of the this object with respect to class A that gets returned from Object.clone()? That sounds logical to me.</div><div></div><div></div><div>Thus, the call to a child clone() method, while it will call the parents' clones, also adds its own specific modifications to the newly made copy. What comes out, in this case, will be a Fruit, not an Object.</div><div></div><div></div><div>Object's clone method is very tricky. It's based on field copies, and it's "extra-linguistic." It creates an object without calling a constructor. There are no guarantees that it preserves the invariants established by the constructors. There have been lots of bugs over the years, both in and outside Sun, stemming from the fact that if you just call super.clone repeatedly up the chain until you have cloned an object, you have a shallow copy of the object. The clone generally shares state with the object being cloned. If that state is mutable, you don't have two independent objects. If you modify one, the other changes as well. And all of a sudden, you get random behavior.</div><div></div><div></div><div>This is a luciferase reporter of beta-catenin-mediated transcriptional activation. In HEK cells, maximal activation of this reporter is 100-fold (activation by Wnt) up to 1,000-fold (activation by phosphorylation mutants of beta-catenin). The appropriate control plasmid is clone M51, Super8XFOPflash, which has mutant TCF/LEF binding sites.</div><div></div><div></div><div>This construct was made by Ajamete Kaykas in the Moon lab. The backbone is the pTA-Luc vector of Clontech, which provides a minimal TA viral promoter driving expression of the firefly luciferase gene (see company publications for details). 7 TCF/LEF binding sites were cloned into the Mlu1 site of this vector (7 copies of: AGATCAAAGGgggta, with TCF/LEF binding site in CAP letters, and a spacer in lower case, separating each copy of the TCF/LEF site).</div><div></div><div></div><div>Make sure you report this to Apple with a copy of the project, as there may nor may not be people on these forums who can help with these issues. If you post the Feedback number those that can see it can take a look.</div><div></div><div></div><div>We're always interested in improving build times. I understand that you can't share all of your code, but there are still things you can do that can potentially let us fix your problem. In particular, you may be able to isolate some code that's now significantly slower to build. This blog post seems to be a pretty complete and up-to-date exploration of how to approach this. The first thing to do is to get build timings under both releases so that you can verify that the problem is that Swift compilation is slower and it's not something more surprising in the build. Assuming it shows that the problem is indeed the Swift compiler, rebuild using the long-compile-time warnings and compare the output to see if there are functions that are significantly slower to type-check than they used to be. If there are, try to copy those functions into new projects with just as much context as is necessary to keep them slow to compile, then file bugs with those reduced examples. You can rename all of your types and methods in order to preserve any secrets you don't want to share.</div><div></div><div></div><div>How cells regulate +#- and +#-tubulin to meet the demand for +#+#-heterodimers and avoid consequences of monomer imbalance is not understood. We investigate the role of gene copy number and how shifting expression of +#- or +#-tubulin genes impacts tubulin proteostasis and microtubule function in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We find that +#-tubulin gene copy number is important for maintaining excess +#-tubulin protein compared to +#-tubulin protein. Excess +#-tubulin prevents accumulation of super-stoichiometric +#-tubulin, which leads to loss of microtubules, formation of non-microtubule assemblies of tubulin, and disrupts cell proliferation. In contrast, sub-stoichiometric +#-tubulin or overexpression of +#-tubulin has minor effects. We provide evidence that yeast cells equilibrate +#-tubulin protein concentration when +#-tubulin isotype expression is increased. We propose an asymmetric relationship between +#- and +#-tubulins, in which +#-tubulins are maintained in excess to supply +#+#-heterodimers and limit the accumulation of +#-tubulin monomers.</div><div></div><div> df19127ead</div>
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2