In Foundry Scenarios, Is it possible to run functions across multiple scenarios? - palantir-foundry

I would like to run functions across a few of my Scenarios, but I'm not sure how to configure this. Is it possible to run functions across multiple Scenarios?

It’s not currently possible to author code that operates across scenarios.
You can display values from multiple scenarios in the chart and table widgets using the comparison scenarios option.
You can also display values from function backed variables evaluated in different scenarios and even pass those results to a separate function to calculate differences, e.g., to calculate deltas between scenarios.

Related

High order forward made automatic differentiation

For quite some time I have been wondering how automatic differentiation works. However, I am a bit confused on how the forward mode works -- I am not equipped to deal with reverse mode at the moment. I have tried to read the source code of some libraries (mainly autodiff) and read some papers (e.g. FAD) in order to understand how people are doing it, with little success.
My main issue is I don't get how dual numbers are used. For example, let's say we define a class of dual numbers (in C++) that holds two numbers; value and derivative. Then, we can overload different mathematical functions and operators, in order to define the dual number algebra (as in the complex number case). Then, and this is my problem, no matter we do, we are only going to get first derivatives.
I keep reading about implementation of hyper-dual numbers, which are described as duals that store values, Jacobian, Hessian, etc. If this is true, then if I have a function of 15 variables and I need the third derivative wrt all of them, my computer is going to blow up... Since there are very efficient libraries out there that do such calculations, I am clearly missing something.
I don't have a specific coding question, I would appreciate any input on how forward mode autodiff can be implemented in a practical way.
More info
I have written a basic dual number library in C++, which you can find on github. However, once I finished writing the class and a few function overloads, I gave up due to the problem I describe above (DualNumbers.cpp has several examples, thogouh).
Recently I also started again, this time using expression templates (because I wanted to learn how to use them) -- see github, but this approach has another issue I describe in another question.

Is there a reality capture parameter to request the desired number of vertices?

In the previous reality capture system users could set a parameter which would determine the resolution of the output models. I want to wind up with models about 100-150K vertices. Is there a setting that allows me to request the modeler to keep the number of generated vertices within some bounds, somewhere in the forge API?
The vertex/triangle decimation is usually, what can be called "subjective" task, which can also explain why there are so many optimization algorithms in the wild.
One type of optimization you would need and expect for "organic" models, and totally different one for an architectural building.
The Reality Capture API provides you only with raw Hi-Res results, avoiding "opionated" optimizations. This should be considered just as a step in automation pipeline.
Another step, would be, upon receiving, to automatically optimize the resulted mesh based on set of settings you need.
One of these steps could be Design Automation for 3ds Max, where you feed a model and using the ProOptimizer Modifier within 3ds Max, you output the mesh with needed detail. A sample of this step, can be found here: https://forge-showroom.autodesk.io/post/prooptimizer.
There are also numerous opensource solutions which should help you cover this post-processing step.

Is it possible to use "Runtime.addBinding" of CDP method two times in only one CDP Session?

I need to investigate two functions in different "bindingCalled" event. I want to learn whether it is possible?

Sensible way to have a common set of roles as base for multiple playbooks in ansible?

I use ansible to manage a wide range of VMs, all with their own specifics, but each have some roles commonly defined under them.
Eg. multiple playbooks reference a role, that sets up admin users with access, same goes for ssh setup, timesync, timezone etc.
Now these roles are explicitly referenced in the same way in these playbooks, which is hard to maintain if a role happens to change.
I tried two methods:
Include playbooks: While an included playbook can be ran for an inventory file, which would cover all the needed VMs, it still has a separate configuration set, and I would try to avoid possible misconfigurations with included playbooks
Master role with included roles: I managed to make this method work by passing variables, however it is a bit hard to set up, not to mention because of this maintainability and tracability of variable flow defeats the purpose of ease of use.
If anyone more experienced, is there a suggested way to group commonly used roles together while still having the option to use the separately if needed?
I would not want to say that I'm more experienced, but I do have a way of 'making it work for me', and am also struggling with the question if this is the best (or at least a good) way of doing it.
My hosts are divided in groups, and each group has it own set of
variables in group_vars.
I have a single playbook for each top-level
group ("server" and "client").
The roles are split up according to
function ("webserver" or "gnome-desktop").
Whenever a role is used by multiple hosts or groups, I use conditionals based on
inventory_hostname, groups or a custom variable. This does generate
some repetition, but that can be kept minimal by conditionally
importing tasks.
To be completely honest: I'm not there yet, but in a few weekends from now I hope to get there :-).

When to make class and function?

I am a beginner to programming when I start to code I just start writing and solve the problem.
I write whole program in a single main function.
I don't know when to make class, and functions.
What are good books which I read to learn these concepts?
A very general question, so just a few rules of thumb:
code reuse: when you have the same or very similar piece of code in two places, it should be moved to a function
readibility: if a function spans more than a single page on screen, you may want to break it apart into several functions
focus: every class or function should do only one specific task. Everything that is not core to this purpose should be delegated to other classes/functions.
I think the canonical answer here is that you should organize your code so that it's readable and maintainable. With that said, it's also important to consider the cost of organizing your code, and how long you expect your code to live.
More directly in response to your question: functions should be used to replace repetitive or otherwise well contained pieces of code. If you apply the same 10 operations over and over again on the same kinds of elements/data you might want to think about collecting all that information into a more concise and clear function. In general, a function needs well defined inputs and outputs.
Classes, in essence, collect functions and data together. Much like you should use a function to collect operations into concise, well defined collections of operations, classes should organize functions and data relevant to be stored together. That is, if you have a bunch of functions that operate on some things like a steering wheel, brakes, accelerators, etc. you should think about having a Vehicle class to organize these relevant functions and data/objects.
Beyond acting as an organizational element, classes should be used to enable easy reuse and creation of multiple "things" - suppose you wanted a collection of those Vehicles. Classes allow you to tie meaning or at least some semantics to your program.
The point of all this, though, is to make your life and the lives of others easier hen it comes to authoring and maintaining your program. So, by all means, when you need a solution to a problem in less than ten minutes and you think it's a one-time use program, ignore all this if you think it'll let you accomplish what you need to faster. Bear in mind, all this organization, semantics and ease of repetitve operation exists to make it easier to accomplish your objectives.
This is a stylistic and preference question and depending on how formal a place you work at it could be a matter of standards. I follow a couple of rules.
Classes
Sets of related data belong in classes together
Functions to operate on that data should be in the classes together
The classic Example is the Car class functions would be things like Drive and AddGass
Functions
If you are going to use it more then once it should be in a function
Most functions should be no more then one screen of code
Functions Should do one thing well not a bunch of things poorly
there Are a ton of opinions, but over time you must develop your own style.
It's actually very simple nicky!
The purpose of splitting code into methods is simply to allow its reuse. When you create a method you allow your program to invoke it at any time from several places instead of repeating the code again and again.
So every time you write lines and think... 'hey, I might need this functionality again somewhere in my program', then you need to put it in a method.
As for classes, you will try to group similar functionalities together. And try to keep classes short and simple. If you need several classes, you'll also group them in packages and so on.
When I write code, I usually have a pretty good idea what I'll be using again. But often I will start to write a few lines of code and realize that I wrote something quite similar in the past. So I'll find it and put it in a method then the two or more locations can now just invoke it. That is reuse at its best!
You can often use analyzers to find various metrics which will "put a grade" on your reuse and code duplication.
Happy learning!
Have a look at
Procedure, subroutine or function?, Object-oriented programming
An object is actually a discrete
bundle of functions and procedures,
all relating to a particular
real-world concept such as a bank
account holder or hockey player in a
computer game. Other pieces of
software can access the object only by
calling its functions and procedures
that have been allowed to be called by
outsiders.
Basically, you use a function/procedure/method to encapsulate a specific section of code that does a specific job, or for reusibility.
Classes are used to encapsulate/represent an object with possibly its own data, and specific function/procedure/method that makes sense to use with this object.
In some languages classes can be made static, with static function/procedure/method which can then be used as helper function/procedure/method
Just FYI, it'll become more evident when and why functions are useful as you progress to larger projects. I was a bit confused by their use when I first started too, when your entire program is only 20-50 lines of code which follows a very linear path, they don't make much sense. But when you start re-using tidbits of code, it makes sense to throw it in functions. Also makes it easier to read and follow the logic of your program if you only have to read descriptive function names, rather than deciphering what the next 5 lines of code are supposed to do.
I found myself asking this same question, and it led me to this post.
I think that one of the most confusing things about how OOP is explained to beginners is the idea that classes represent exactly what they sound like: classes of things, like Computer, Dog, Car, etc.
This is fine as far as it goes, but it's not strictly true, and the reality is much more abstract. Sometimes, classes don't really represent anything that could be considered a clearly defined abstraction of a group of things. Sometimes, they just organize stuff.
For this reason, I think "class" is really a misnomer, or at least misleading. A more relatable way to think about what a class is might be to simply think of it as a "group" or a "logical grouping."