Result of boost::posix_time::milliseconds(0) - c++11

What is the behaviour of boost::posix_time::milliseconds() function if value 0 is passed as argument to this function?

The function boost::posix_time::milliseconds(long) creates an object of type time_duration which represents a certain amount of time. boost::posix_time::milliseconds(0) will, therefore, represent a duration of 0 seconds.

Related

How to measure and capture a script’s execution time in DolphinDB?

I’d like to measure and capture my script’s execution time and assign it to an variable. I tried to assign the return of function timer to variable a, but it raised an exception of “invalid expression”.
a = timer x=1
The exception is raised because timer is not a function but a procedure. It only prints a message that cannot be assigned to a variable. However, you can use function evalTimer, which returns a scalar that can be assigned to a variable.
To use function evalTimer, you can rewrite the statement block as a user-defined function. See evalTimer — DolphinDB 1.3 documentation
You can also check the syntax of a function with syntax:
syntax(evalTimer)
// evalTimer(funcs, [count=1])
funcs: the function(s) for which the execution time is measured
count: the number of times funcs will be executed. The default value is 1.
To measure the execution time of function foo:
def foo(){
x=1
}
a= evalTimer(foo,10);
print(a)
// output: 0.031341
In the above example, the code to be executed is encapsulated into a user-defined function foo. Then use function evalTimer to measure the time of running function foo 10 times, assign the result to variable a, and print it out.

Is it possible to pre-assign values to decision variables in CPLEX OPL

I have a large number of variables ( both Binary and Continuous). Therefore I have determined a logic to assign some variables set to 0 so that they do not become part of the optimisation process.
For example I have a binary decision variable y[b][t]:
where b varies from 1 to 100
and t from 1 to 5.
I could determine using some logic that y[20][2] onwards to y[100][2] would be 0. I want to assign the fixed value of 0 to these variables y[20][2] onwards to y[100][2] thereby reducing the number of variables in my optimisation problem. While y is a binary decision variable I have other continuous variable as well which I would like to similarly set to 0 in advance.
Is there a way how this can be achieved ? I haven't used Python with CPEX but hear that this can be probably be achieved by setting a lower and upper bound of the variables. Is there a similar method in OPL.
----Added 13th Aug
May be I was not very clear or I could not understand the solution suggested.
What I wanted is say I have the following decision variable Xbmt ...(I have a few of them)
Originally declared as :
dvar float+ Xbmt[PitBlocks][Plants][TimePeriods];
But for some of the PitBlocks and some time periods I want to define this decision variable as 0. Those time periods for which I want to set the decision variable as 0 are defined in a tuple nullVariables. It has block id same as PitBlocks, and it has time_period same as TimePeriod. Hence I want something like below. But I cannot declare the decision variable twice. I need it 0 only for those ids in the nullVariable set.
dvar float+ Xbmt[NullVariablesSet.block_id][Plants][NullVariablesSet.time_period] in 0..0;
How can this be achieved where some of Xbmt remain as decision variables where as some are removed by setting as 0
see https://github.com/AlexFleischerParis/zooopl/blob/master/zoopreassign.mod
within
Making Decision Optimization Simple
int nbKids=300;
{int} seats={40,30}; // how many seats, {} means this is a set
float costBus[seats]=[500,400];
// Now let s see how preassign some decision variables
// Suppose we know that we have exactly 6 buses 40 seats
{int} preassignedseats={40};
int preassignedvalues[preassignedseats]=[6];
dvar int+ nbBus[s in seats]
in
((s in preassignedseats)?preassignedvalues[s]:0)
..
((s in preassignedseats)?preassignedvalues[s]:maxint);
minimize sum(b in seats) costBus[b]*nbBus[b];
subject to
{
sum(b in seats) b*nbBus[b]>=nbKids;
}

What gets executed first in a nested function?

When I create a constant to put my closure to work:
let incrementByTen = makeIncrementer(forIncrement: 10)
Does it skip incrementer() until it's called in the return statement, that way the return statement can run the incrementer() function in the end and receive its value?
func makeIncrementer(forIncrement amount: Int) -> () -> Int {
var runningTotal = 0
func incrementer() -> Int {
runningTotal += amount
return runningTotal
}
return incrementer
}
The arguments to a function are evaluated when the function is called. In this case that means that when makeIncrementer is called, it's argument (10 in this case) will be evaluated before makeIncrementer is actually called.
Likewise, when makeIncrementer is invoked, it's code will be executed in sequence, initializing runningTotal and then initializing incrementer (note that at this point amount has been evaluated already, so in the returned incremented, it is ALWAYS 10.
Subsequently, when you invoke incrementByTen() there are no arguments to pass and nothing to be evaluated before the call, as part of executing the closure, runningTotal will be incremented by amount, in this case, always 10.
In a comment you have extended your question with:
I've read that this function captures a reference to runningTotal and amount. What's hard to grasp is how it keeps increasing when I repeatedly call incrementByTen().
The function incrementer captures the value of amount and the variable runningTotal. Capturing a value just involves copying the value into the function value (aka closure).
Capturing the variable is more involved: as a local variable runningTotal's lifetime would usually only extend at most to the end of the function invocation it is created by - so a call to makeIncrementer would create a new local runningTotal and when that call returned the variable would be destroyed. However as runningTotal is captured as a variable by incrementer then its lifetime is automatically extended as long as it is required by incrementer, which is as long as incrementer itself is required. As incrementer is the value returned by makeIncrementer the lifetime of runningTotal extends past the lifetime of the call to makeIncrementer.
Later each time the function returned by a single call to makeIncrementer is invoked as it has captured the variable runningTotal from that call it is incremented by 10 and its current value returned.
If you call makeIncrementer twice and store both results, then each result references a distinct function and each of those functions references a distinct variable - so you have two distinct incrementing counters.
HTH

Passing 3rd parameter to memcmp as -1 return 0

For memecmp(), the third parameter is size_t(unsigned).
But when we pass third parameter as -1 returns always 0, eventhough the memory block pointed by first and second parameters are different?
What are you comparing? memcmp() returns 0 if the contents in the two memory blocks are equal.

Sorting array using Javascript function - Understanding

I decided to get shuffled values from array. for that i used this function, i got it from net, it works fine. But i don't know, how it's works...
any one can help me to understand this?
my code is :
function rand(ar){
return 0.5-Math.random();
}
var ar = [5,10,15,20,25]
ar.sort(rand);
console.log(ar)
I am using this function for getting new shuffled array values from the declared one.
This code is using the supplied rand function as the comparison operator for the Array.Sort method (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/4b4fbfhk(VS.85).aspx). Since the Math.random (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/41336409.aspx) function returns a value from 0 (inclusive) to 1 (exclusive), the rand function will return a value from 0.5 (inclusive) to -0.5 (exclusive).
Normally the sortFunction supplied to the Sort method takes 2 arguments that are compared. The sortFunction compares them and returns a value that means:
Negative - The first item is less than the second
Zero - The items are equal
Positive - The first item is greater than the second
As the sort method runs, it uses this comparison to determine which array values should go before the others.
In the case of your code, the rand function's return value is random and has no correlation to the data. This means that, whenever the sort function tries to compare two values in the array, half of the time it will say the first item is less than the second and half the second item will be less than the first. As this is done over the entire length of the array, items are swapped randomly and the whole array becomes randomized.
array.sort() has an optional parameter that is a sorting function, you can pass a function reference to change the order of the array.
Maybe this page can be helpful http://www.javascriptkit.com/javatutors/arraysort.shtml

Resources