cheap Mechanical Parts And Components

Description:non-standard high precision cnc machining parts
Details:
Material: carbon steel(cold rolled steel sheet,galvanized steel sheet),stainless steel, copper, brass, aluminum, etc
MOQ:1 pieces MetaL Sheet Processing Part
Type:Broaching, Drilling, Etching / Chemical Machining, Laser Machining, Milling, Other Machining Services, Rapid Prototyping, Turning, Wire EDM
Processing: CNC machining/turning/milling/drilling/grinding
Surface Treatment:All kinds of surface treatment is available: anodizing, zinc plating, black oxide, chrome plating, powder coating, ect
Micro Machining or Not:Micro Machining
Place of OriginBig Grinalian, China (Mainland)
Brand Name:Crest
Color: Customer Request
Size:Customer’s Drawings
Tolerance:+/-0.002mm
Application:Electronic,automotive,medical, marine,aerospace,ect
Prototype:Acceptable
Certificate:ISO9001
Place of OriginBig Grinalian, China (Mainland)
Delivery time: Strictly according to customer confirmed order.
Professional team:Over 6 years experience in metal fabrication,professional CNC customized OEM service and skilled worker
Quality control:100% inspection, Check the raw material before the production/ Have inspection during the production
Packaging & Delivery
Packaging Details:inner use bubble film, , outer is carton box, or wooden case with IPPC or customized by buyer
Port:Dalian,china
Delivery way:by sea or by DHL/OCS/UPS/TNT/FEDEX etc
Field of use
Automotive, automatic equipment,printing machine
size: customized
Features:
CNC manufacture in China
Material:Aluminum alloy,Steel,Brass,Copper,Stainless steel,Plastic,ect
Services;Precision machining,CNC turning, milling ,forging,ect
Production type:Machining, Turning ,milling,forging,forging machining, cylinders,shafts, housing,flanges, handles,frame,ect.
Drawings’ format acceptedTongueDF IGS STEP DXF,ect.
Surface treatment:Anodizing,sand blasting,silk screen,engraving,hardening,blacking,powder coating, electroplating.
Customized CNC machining services:
1.Your inquiry related to our products or prices will be replied within 24 hours .
2.Experienced staffs to answer all your inquiries in fluent English.
3.Protection of your sales area, ideas of design and all your private information.
4.No matter big order or small order we will provide all the best quality,best service.
5.Advanced technical equipments to make sure all parts are correct.
6.Direct factory,can update you the latest progress at the first time.cheap Mechanical Parts And Components
website:http://www.klstautomatic.com/mechanical-parts-and-components/

Does it make sense to write one unit test and loop it through similar components?

I have a situation where I have different forms, each with 4 or 5 steps (components), and I decided to write one unit test per step.

After doing it, I noticed they were very similar and I could just loop through them, changing some values based on the loop index. All good and worked fine, until one of the forms failed and I couldn’t figure out which step was failing . I could provide another generic solution for it, but this failure made me wonder if it really makes sense to reuse code for tests like this.

Well… as developers, we always want to reduce code duplicates, but I think for unit/snapshot tests, it’s a best practice to have every test explicit. The advantage I see by duplicating code in this situation is that it makes it more clear, easy to debug when a failure happens and also, once it’s test code, it doesn’t impact production code. What are your thoughts on it? Does it worth to have generic code to test several similar components, or is it better and safer to have it more explicit, even if you have to duplicate the code?

I also read this article on twitter, a few days ago that opened my mind for this approach even more: https://www.sandimetz.com/blog/2016/1/20/the-wrong-abstraction WDYT?

How big are somatic components? [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:

  • How loud/obvious is a wizard casting a spell? 3 answers
  • What Conditions prevent a caster from using Somatic spells? 4 answers

I am wondering how large the hand gestures have to be for spells with somatic components. I know in the question How loud/obvious is a wizard casting a spell? the Player Basic Rules p.79 say,

Spellcasting gestures might include a forceful gesticulation or an intricate set of gestures.

so they don’t have to be forceful or intricate.

Would it be fair to say that lower level spells have smaller, less noticeable, somatic components?


For an example, Mage Hand (cantrip) may just be a flick of the wrist and wave of fingers, Dispel Good and Evil (5th level) may be more akin to a secret hand shake, and Meteor Swarm (9th level) would require the caster to do the YMCA.


EDIT: This question is less about being noticed casting a spell and more about having the ability to even attempt to cast it. I’ll be honest, it might also be a cheeky way of asking if I (as an arcane trickster) can cast mage hand while I’m in chains and have it pick the lock (which I know is against the spirit of the rules but I’m curious to see if it’s against the letter).

I’m also interested in my question “Do more powerful spells have more forceful gestures?” but I suppose that’s more of a discussion and better suited for the chat.

Which design pattern is recommended for multiple components in web application?

The application is in PHP using Laravel Framework, so I have multiple blade components with his own Javascript code, but must of the times a component requires something that is declared, created or filled in another component in the same father template.

I have the JS objects, following OOP, but the blade components are not objects like those.

I’m looking for a good and clean solution.

Thanks.

Angular Material Stepper and Step separately components

I want to separate my steps from stepper, because I don’t know how many steps I have in each page.

Page:

<test-stepper>   <test-step></test-step>   <test-step></test-step> </test-stepper> 

Stepper:

<mat-horizontal-stepper>   <ng-content select="test-step"></ng-content> </mat-horizontal-stepper> 

Step:

<mat-step>   <ng-template matStepLabel>Label</ng-template>    <div>     <button mat-button matStepperNext>Next</button>   </div>  </mat-step> 

I did this, but it not show any step.

Thanks all 😀

If you cast Darkness using sorcery points (Shadow Sorcerer) do you need material components?

Shadow Sorcerers at 3rd level gain the spell Darkness which doesn’t count against spells known. In addition, you can cast this spell by expending 2 sorcery points. I wanted to know if you could circumvent the material cost by using sorcery points. I’m assuming you do need the components as sorcery points seem to function like auxiliary spell slots.

Fastest way to look up an entity with a set of components?

I’m currently trying to implement an ECS system, but I’ve sort of ran into a problem trying to fetch all of my entities that have a specific set of components. I currently have a Dictionary that maps a component name to a list of Guids (entities), so I have no problem fetching a list of entities if I were to query for just one component. But if I were to query entities for more than one component (e.g. all entities that have Render and Transform component), I run into a problem where it’s no longer a constant time lookup.

I could probably loop through the entities to see if they contain that set of component names (they are stored in a dictionary that maps Guid to a list of strings), but I was thinking that there could be a faster way of doing this?

All components dependent only on a core component [on hold]

I’m kind of obsessed about hiding all implementations in .net behind interfaces. I came up with idea of storing all interfaces in a core component (with dtos and so on) and their implementations in many others. The only one component in the system that is dependent on all the others is a bootstrapper for dependency injection, and the rest is dependent only on the core and conditionally on the bootstrapper.

I consider component as the smallest deployable unit e.g dll.

Is this approach too extreme? What are possible issues that can occur?

What would be the impact of ignoring material components with a price?


Problem

Whenever I play a spellcaster, and I level up and it’s time to pick/prepare new spells, I almost always avoid those with material components that have a price, since you can’t just substitute them out for your spellcasting focus (i.e. ignore them like you can pretty much all other material components).

The idea that you have to keep an eye out for these very specific and very expensive items (Imprisonment seems like a particularly good example of how obscure and expensive some of these materials can get, although it is an extreme, what with it being a 9th level spell, Clairvoyance is a less extreme lower-level example) and I find this quite annoying and I just end up changing my decision of spells instead of dealing with that restriction, thereby effectively taking that spell out of the game. I’ll point out that I’ve never asked my DM how likely I am to find the item; I just change my decision.

D&D is about being heroes and killing dragons and such, not about shopping around for extremely obscure items just so you can do something once (if it’s one of those spells that consumes it, which are the worse type of spells-with-a-material-component-with-a-price), then it’s back to hoping you find this obscure item again… or just pick a different spell in the first place that just works all the time.

Solution

So, since I know some of my players have similar views on being put off certain spells because of certain material restrictions, I was planning on simply doing away with that rule in an upcoming game I’ll be DMing (i.e. houseruling that all material components can be substituted out for your focus, including those with a cost, even if it says they are consumed, which obviously won’t consume the focus if a focus is used; alternatively, Component Pouches just always happen to have those items in them, like the mere desire to cast that spell forces those items to spawn into existence inside the pouch).

Question

My question is: What impact on gameplay balance would this have? I mean, obviously PCs (and NPCs) would have easier access to more powerful spells that otherwise have a sort of “cap” on them, so I might have to adjust the difficulty of encounters and such, but otherwise would it be so bad to effectively re-include the spells into the game that would otherwise exclude themselves by having unattractive material component restrictions?


PS: My home universe doesn’t have resurrection spells, so concern about everyone just getting up all the time like everyone’s a Zealot Barbarian all of a sudden is not all that relevant to this question; I mean, you can include it in your answer if you like, but I’d rather you not make it your main point.