Usually they do that:interface IFractal<T> where T : IFractal<T> It'll make it possible to walk on navigational properties without a specific type T knowledge.

As Vlad from Moscow commented on the question, the question is rather strange, and in my view it is not quite correct -- either your teacher is not very good at expressing his mind, or you somehow misrepresented his question. The point is, the method is to change the reference actually. Strictly speaking, in Jave, it is usually not the references to the object, but the variables (fields, arguments) of an objective type. But the actual significance of such variables is the references to objects. Methods as their arguments are provided with copies of these references and can do what they want (i.e. assigning them the meaning of references to other objects or null - the empty link), which does not affect the variables that were transmitted to the method when it is called. So that's the code. public class TestQQ { static void qq(String s) { System.out.println(s); s = "Что-то новое..."; // Это ссылка или не ссылка меняется ? System.out.println(s); } public static void main(String[] args) { String string = "Нельзя менять ссылки?"; qq(string); System.out.println(string); } } Creates a new object of the String class with the meaning of "No change of reference?"Establishes the reference to it by variable string;qqq() and sends him a copy of the variable string (i.e. creates a second reference to the same line, "Do not change references?"qq() isolates the contents of the object referred to in its parameter, i.e. the same &quot; tree &quot; ;The qqq() method for its parameter s attributes a new meaning - the reference to the new line, the second reference to the nudity disappears, but the reference variable string in the main programme does not change, and still contains a reference to the same original tree?qq() prints a new line (Some new...") and returns control to the main program. Method main(s) prints the contents of the object, which is contained (i.e. reference to) in the variable string, is still the original line, "Not to change references?" The conclusion will be:Нельзя менять ссылки? Что-то новое Нельзя менять ссылки? But it must be clearly understood that while the method cannot change the meaning of the objective variable given to it as a parameter (i.e. reference to the object), it can change the object for a nice soul! For example, in such a programme import java.util.ArrayList; public class TestQQQ { static void qqq(ArrayList list) { list.add("можно."); } public static void main(String[] args) { ArrayList strings = new ArrayList(); strings.add("А объекты менять...?"); qqq(strings); System.out.println(strings); } } qqqq() adds to the list that he received, a new line "possible." and as a result, we get out here that:[А объекты менять...?, можно.]

Modified PATH contains a list of directors in which the operating system is trying to search for the completed files if the launch user has not clearly indicated the way to the right performing file.Let us imagine that the Windows operating system computer has two different versions of the Python programming language interpreter. This could be done if they were found in different directories, for example, C:\Python27 and C:\Python34♪ The completed file for both versions is called python.exe♪In order to launch the completed file with the right version, a complete way can be indicated, for example, But every time you point out the full path, you must remember it.The alternative is to add to the PATH variable environment the path to the directory where this completed file is located, and then it can be launched with only a name. And to find out where he is (in the view of the operating system) you can use the team. where Windows operating system or team which Linux or MacOS. In more detail, http://barancev.github.io/what-is-path-env-var/ article.

I would suggest that there is little other option to call the method accordingly.'login' => 'Login' 'getList' => 'GetList' and instigate.$className = ucfirst($method); if(class_exists($className)) { new $className($data); } else { new WrongMethod($data); } In theory of complexity of algorithms, all three above the adopted methods are the same as that of me.

You can pass as much as the code algorithm allows. It's clear that when we get down to the physical level, no one's gonna pass 1 and 0. It's coded. The simplest coding used is the following. 0 is coded 0-1 and 1 is coded as 1-0 (1 is voltage, zero is not). Why not just one and one, and that's to avoid a situation when a lot of zeros or units are transferred. It's clear that in this case one Virtual Tat will be handed over to one battle (or even half of the bat, watching a pattern).Can I get two bats for tact? And it's probably better to say, "Transition one time" Turns out you can. It's not just a signal-no signal, but we'll use an implide modulation. In short, 00 is zero volt, 01-1 volt, 10 is volt and 11-3 volts. Yeah, this system will be unstable for a long series of zeros or units, but the point is moving. It's an obvious case that three bats can be transferred. The main thing is, on the foster side, have a mood. https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE-%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%84%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%8E%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87 so he could decode. Most interesting, this technique is used in modern times. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C ♪ Every cell in it is a small condenser. And the different voltages in it code the bats. MLC uses two bats on a cell, TLC, three bats.Can I give you more? There are different coding techniques. For example, https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%83%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B4%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8F%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F ♪ QAM-16 upgrades 4 bats per time and QAM-256 to 8 bats. And these coding techniques are actually used in the technique. But explaining how they work, it's already outside this post, and it's a one-two-two-dollar technical graduate course in the radio system.

Don't be wise and make it easier.Does the name characterize the element sufficiently?Yeah, go to p. 2.No, rename, then go to para. 2.Could there be some of these elements?- Do they all have to look the same?Yeah, just use class.No, use the investment.No, it'sThe second option... at a high level of investment, the moves make a big way.It's the most common and most optimised operation. It's almost free.

After the Dayxtra worked for the start-up top, we got a d1[] shortest distance from the start-up point to any, now we're launching Dickerst for the second time, just from the finish line, we get a d2[] shortest distance from the finish point to any. We now proceed on all the peaks that do not belong to the shortest route and find a peak v, for which d1[v] + d2[v] is minimally possible, through it, and will take the second shortest route (with long d1[v] + d2[v]).Pseudocod:1. shortestPath, d1[] = Dijkstra(start) 2. d2 = Dijkstra(finish) 3. dist = infinity, w = -1 for (v : AllVertices \ shortestPath) if (d1[v] + d2[v] < dist) dist = d1[v] + d2[v], w = v 4. Восстанавливаем кратчайший путь от start до w и добавляем кратчайший путь от w до finish - это и будет второй кратчайший путь The temporal complexity will coincide with the complexity of Dextra, so it's not gonna get much faster:The decision does not, however, guarantee that the second minimum route will not fully contain the first minimum route But I think it's not hard to add.

Suze the best. dispatch_after: https://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/Performance/Reference/GCD_libdispatch_Ref/index.html#//apple_ref/c/func/dispatch_after You're transferring the block, the interval of time through which this block will be implemented and the turn on which all this will happen. In your case, it's faster. Everything. dispatch_get_main_queue()

Decision for N*S memory, N*S*S or N*S*log S time. S - размер дерева♪Dynamics F[vert][size] - Best answer if we support the top. vert Here we go. size elements.For any component F[u][0] = 0That's all for the leaf. For the top of the pseudocod.for (int i=0;i<min(N,l.size());i++) F[u][i+1] = F[l][i] + D[u][l]; for (int i=0;i<min(N,r.size());i++) F[u][i+1] = max(F[u][i+1],F[r][i] + D[u][l]); for (int i=0;i<min(N-1,l.size());i++) for (int j=0; j < min(N-i-1,r.size()); j++) F[u][i+j+2] = max(F[u][i+j+2], D[u][l] + D[u][r] + F[l][i] + F[r][j]); Something like that. We're either taking only one backup. Either we take two, then we take as many on the left and as many on the right.Response - importance F[root][N]♪ To accelerate the use of a double cycle Быстрое преобразование Фурье (FFT)♪

Stat analysers on the basis formalities (Programmes cannot otherwise) language semantics of programme conclusions, giving the opportunity to detect types of automatic errorsaccelerating the development/stabilization of the programme product.The same function is now often performed by the compilators (whether they are still collecting the original code of the programme, so they can do this with a minimum of bicycles) prevention (warnings), but strictly speaking, this is weak in the compilation process itself.Refactincluding manually produced. Opportunities to prove (although for itself) that some conversion does not change the code, enables the process to be more confident and faster without any details of implementation; up to automatically Development media (if formal evidence has been obtained).The lack of this opportunity slows or reverses the default, resulting in a gradual increase in the complexity of the code support, which reduces the productivity of the developers in their further work.As a general rule, there is a certain acceptance in the programme community (in the project, technology, some) Steel Standard (style guide) for code. This is done not only to make other members of the same community less difficult to read the code written in the community, but also to advance. Safe practicesuse of which reduces the risk of error (and save time for their panties). For these practices to be developed, it is necessary to understand the semantics of the language (but not necessarily understand it).

In the C#, the arguments are actually transmitted by meaning. It's just a matter of argument.If these arguments are numbers or similar objects (they are referred to as characters), they are transmitted as they are - they are transferred. copy♪And if the arguments are class objects (they are referred to as reference types), then they are transmitted by weight. reference (i mean, if you're familiar with C) at the facility, not a copy of the object itself. Copies of the reference are as accessible as the original, and this is the same object.Why is that done? The thing is, not all objects can be spurred. And even if this is possible, what about the references to other objects that contain this object? Clonate all internal objects? It's too long and too hard (e.g. what to do if the references are in the cycle?) And if internal objects are not cloned, the same problem arises: the object itself is copied, and the inner objects will still be by reference.

PS - software - is a group of programmes that address a certain task (integrating candy fenthicks), conducting a process (inspecting photos of catholics), operating a certain division (buchgaltery), etc. This group of programmes is unnamed, it cannot have its own name. You can't say "Fantics," "Cotics" or "Buchgaltery" is just not Russian. Instead, they're talking Fantics, photographic surveillance, accounting.Because P.O. doesn't have a name, you can always call it something else. Looking at the photos is likely to turn into a cat scan or to be part of the rest room. If there's the same Windows viewer there, it'll be the same software as you don't.IT is an information system, on the contrary, always a name. There might be an MI of "Fanticas," "Coticas" and "Buchgaltery." But IC's viewing photos also has the right to exist. Also, the MI does not require that its components have some form of unifying sign - the existence of the Fantica and Buhgalteria MI is acceptable if, of course, anyone needs such an MI.On the other hand, the name for the IP only comes up with someone who distributes it. You can't buy an I.P.F., and then write the papers that the I.D.'s "Peace of Candy" is completely different, even if they're made of the same components (although one IP can still be part of another, but usually they're not called systems, but subsystems).Another difference between the MI and the MI may contain components other than programmes or data. For example, IPs, which provide passengers on the train station with a schedule of trains, may well include information kiosks. However, according to the name, only programmes may be included, otherwise APO (appropriation and software) will be called.UPDThe point is, IP is a broader concept than P. At a minimum, the MI, in addition to the PA, includes operating instructions and other administrative regulations, as well as a certain composition of technical equipment. Yeah, that's a good point. I'd synthesize him. IPs, as called, exist as long as there is a package of documents defining it. This package includes all possible instructions and other administrative regulations.At the same time, the PA does not require documents for its existence.

It's a way to avoid interlocking.It works simply: all resources are assigned unique numbers. Each flow is permitted only in order to increase the number, the removal of the removal of the blockage is, accordingly, reduced.The most useful method is in situations where all the resources for which locking is required are known in advance. Okay. https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BC%D0%B0_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%8E%D1%89%D0%B8%D1%85_%D1%84%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%BE%D0%B2 You can number forks and make philosophers take fork in order to grow up. A similar solution applies to bank accounts and transfers between them.

It's a shorter idea.If we are at the end of the word, the algorithm ends with a positive response.If the current letter is not Athe algorithm ends with a negative response.Move to the next letter.If we are at the end of the word after the transition, the algorithm ends with a positive response.Move to the next letter and return to paragraph 1.(I'm targeting your algorithm as a sample.)

It is not clear what is meant by the notion of a multi-level protocol. If this occurs in the context of models OSI and TCP/IP I'd call a multi-level model, but there's no protocol. And then, using a multi-level model, you get:The possibility of substituting any of the levels without the need to change any other level (if you work at level four, you'll be guaranteed to receive data from level three, but you're also obliged to transmit the correct data to the 5, really, if necessary, and vice versa if the data are in reverse). For example, the transmission environment (1 OSI level) can be replaced by anything: radio, cable and other, and higher levels of replacement do not require, you still work with the same IP-TCP (to date). This is being implemented by all methods of inculation and deincapulation.Guaranteed organization Logistics at each level. This means that, for example, TCP level (4th) of some server is directly linked to TCP level (4m) of its client. The data thus, if there is the same protocol on the receiving and transmitting side, can be "identified" correctly.

Wikipedia is clicking on the theory and practice to find the code to look for the same code as you were looking for, but add the programming language to the search line (e.g. delphi).Your question is too vague, the theory begins with a lot of Mandelbrot and Julia, the fractical tree is just from Koh's snowflake, not far. L-systems, et cetera.Online generator http://www.kevs3d.co.uk/dev/lsystems/

The parent and the descendants call the elements that the difference between the same level. If the difference between elements at several levels, e.g. ul and em, such elements refer to an ancestor (ul) and descendant (em).I mean, for em parent only li, so if this li specifically has children, they'll only be sisterly to em.

Look. Non-determinism is essentially the acceleration of the rutfors.Like, let's find out if the number is simple. n♪ The obvious method is to check all the numbers ksmaller n♪ For sharing ♪ n ♪ k♪ (Of course there are better methods.) I mean, we have a series of checks:n Is it 1?n split into two?n split into three?♪ ♪ ♪The algorithm will be O(n).Undeterminated vehicle verification Right away. finds the right thing. kThat's why it's a simple definition of O(1)!In fact, the transition to a non-determinized car means that we are from the task of &quot;find out. kto &quot; verify whether or not it meets the condition &quot; k &quot; because the choice is free of charge.Problems that don't make up for the polyne even in an undeterminated car exist. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NEXPTIME - problems. Vickipedia has an example: looking for a hamilton cycle in a spectacularly special way (which saves the place from processing time).

In order to correctly fail your hech locally, you need to know the current complexity of the network. It's just that it's the number of leading zeros. But it's harder to say that the complexity is a 256-bit number, and the hang you're looking for is less than that number. (32-Bayth hex may also be presented as 256-bit). Complex counts once in 2016 blocks. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty ♪If you include other people's transactions in your block (and you have full right not to do so, and only include the transaction for the generation of new coins), you need to keep the entire blockage local and validate every transaction. Turn on the unfitted tranche, no one's gonna take your block, and your work on finding a hesh is going to go on a label.There is a low-level protocol on the top of TCP to send its block to other parts of the network. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Network ♪When it is considered to be the hex of the block, only the head of the 80-bite block is taken. Among these 80 Byte are:Hesh of the previous block. The blocks thus form an intangible chain, hence the term blockchain.The current complexity of the network.Hesh from all transactions in the current block (calculated on the algorithm of the village of Merkla).

Look, it's about asymptotic complexity. It deals only with tasks that have a simple clear answer: yes or no. For example, is there a XYZ sub-line in this line? Challenges of &quot; find all reversals of this set of numbers &quot; P/NP- problems Not Consider it because there is no answer.Algorithms are often parametered with input data. The time to run the algorithm is, in general, the more the data it has to process. Describe n1, n2, ... parameters describing the dimensions of the input data, t(n1, n2, ...) - maximum time of algorithm for data of this length.If we know that t(n1, n2, ...) limited to top multi-member variables n1, n2, ...the task is called the polynomial time. Class of such tasks and designated as Pthey're considered to becomprehensible.Now what is it? NP- a problem?Imagine that you have an algorithm with a few branches.if- and the cycles that consistently test the decisions, and as soon as they find the right one, it ends with the screaming algorithms. Like, if we're looking for a symbol 'X' In this row, we can test in the cycle whether the first symbol matches the first. XAnd then the second, then the third, and as soon as we found a match, we'll finish the job. Now, imagine a car that magically moves immediately to the right turf of the cycle: X in line "ABCXYZ" She's checking in the 4th position, that's where she needs to be! This magic car is called non-determination The machine (for historical reasons) and, obviously, it does not exist in nature.That's the problem. NP- a test subject if it's decided for a polynomial time on this very chiter, undeterminated car.I see that's all. P- there's a problem. NPIf we're in a normal car, we're gonna take it for a polynomial time, it's chiters, especially! The question is, do you need purity? Maybe any problem that's being solved in an undeterminated car for a polynomial time can be solved, too, for a normal one. polynomial Time?That's the famous one. P/NP- hypothesis: they assume there are problems that can't be solved without an undeterminated machine at a polynomial time. But no one has yet been able to justify it strictly mathematically. The problem is, if we don't have the ability to deal with a challenge for a polynomial time, does that mean that it's not actually being solved for a polynomial time, or are we just not smart enough and inventive?