Can I link Trello boards to create a ‘global view’ of my boards

Is there a way to view cards from all my Trello boards on one summary board.

The reason to do this: I’d like to give different team members access to different boards, however I’d like to have a single board from which I can access all of them – giving me a global view of what is happening.

I can ensure all boards have the same list names, to make it work. Is this possible directly, or is there a way to get a similar result.

Global indexing of shared nodes in parallel

Consider a tiling of quadrilaterals in 2D that provide complete coverage of a particular region. N quadrilaterals are distributed across many parallel threads, typically in a way to keep groups of quadrilaterals together. In each quadrilateral we distribute np nodes, with some nodes located along the boundary of the quadrilateral. This gives rise to a 2D indexing of nodes (i,j) where i=1,..,N is the quadrilateral index and j=1,..,np is the local index of the node within that quadrilateral.

We now wish to develop a map from (i,j) to a global index of nodes that accounts for coincident nodes that may exist along the boundary of the quadrilaterals (e.g., see attached image of two quadrilaterals with three shared nodes — np=9 but global index goes from 1..15). In serial, a simple algorithm would be as follows:

let k = 1 let X = map from local index (i,j) to global index k for each quadrilateral i   for each node j in quadrilateral i     if (i,j) is coincident with a node (i',j')->k' in X       assign index k' to (i,j)     else       assign index k to (i,j) in X       k = k + 1 

In parallel, only elements of this map that are associated with quadrilaterals on the local thread need to be stored. We can further assume that each thread has complete knowledge of the quadrilateral indices and nodes of its own quadrilaterals and those quadrilaterals and nodes that are spatially adjacent.

So the question is: Is there a parallel algorithm that performs better than the serial algorithm above?

Two adjacent quadrilaterals with 3 shared nodes

How to create a global RESTful API in python for a database?

I apologize in advance if the below-given information looks insufficient.

The programming language to be used throughout is python.

I am trying to understand the procedure to create an API for a database that can be accessed by anybody around the world. Like an API “” where there is a proper hostname and want to create a API like that, not like “http://localhost:5000/users” this as explained in the link “”.(please consider that i have no exp in making a API)

I also don’t know if i need to host my database(current location – local computer) somewhere else to create a global API.

So how do i go from making a local api link to a global api link.

The database is a normal database with a single table which contains information like name, id, sales info, time, etc.

Any help would be appreciated.

Global sections of square root line bundle

Let $ C$ be a smooth curve in $ \mathbb{P}^2$ over field $ \mathbb{C}$ . Suppose that I have a very ample line bundle $ L$ on $ C$ of even degree. Then $ L$ has $ 2^{2g}$ square roots in $ Pic\ C$ . These are line bundles $ A$ such that $ A\otimes A=L$ .

What can we say about $ h^0(C,A)$ ? Is it non-empty for all $ A$ ? Or is it possible that no such $ A$ has sections?

Global solutions of the wave equation with bounded initial condition

Let $ f,g$ be bounded compactly supported smooth functions, and assume $ u$ is the solutions of the wave equation $ $ u_{tt}-c^2(x)\Delta u=0 \ \ \hbox{on} \ \ \mathbb{R}^n \times (0,\infty)$ $ $ $ u(x,0)=f, \ \ u_t(x,0)=g, \ \ x\in \mathbb{R}^n,$ $

where $ c(x)>c_0>0$ is also a bounded smooth functions on $ \mathbb{R}^n.$

Does $ u(x,t)$ remain bounded on $ \mathbb{R}^n \times (0,\infty)$ ? It seems to me that this should follow from a standard result about hyperbolic equations but I can’t find a relevant reference.

How to design a reassignable global instance that can be referenced by many other classes

I have a DeviceManager class which can handle different physical devices, and to say there are Classes A,B,C, which require a DeviceManager instance as dependency. They should always use the same instance of DeviceManager, however, at some point of time this DeviceManager should create a new instance in order to wrap a different physical device. So in this case, in terms of maintainability and testability, should I use a static wrapper or dependency injection? I have two solutions, but don’t know which is better, or maybe there is a way better solution.

Static Wrapper:

    public static class DeviceService     {         static IDeviceManager _deviceManager;          public static void Handle() { _deviceManager.Handle(); }          public static void Reset()         {             _deviceManager = new Container.Resolve<IDeviceManager>();         }     } 

ClassA,B,C instances then can use DeviceService.Handle() and at some point of time to use DeviceService.Reset() to reassign a new instance.

Dependency Injection

public ClassA(IDeviceManager dm);

public ClassB(IDeviceManager dm);

public ClassC(IDeviceManager dm);

Assume that if I reassign the DeviceManager, then I will also create new Class A,B,C instances.

Static wrapper is handy, and easy to manage the state, but it relies on Service Locator, which is an implicit dependency since it is not passed and referenced by parameters, would it be a pain in unit testing? And I need to call Reset() explicitly before I use/reuse it. Dependency Injection seems to have lower coupling and it is code agnostic, it can even handle using various DeviceManager instances in the future, but my project has many classes and instances relying on DeviceManager, I need to pass an instance to each of them additionally.

I still cannot decide on which one is better, and why. I need you helps.

Is Global Choice conservative over Zermelo with Choice?

To be explicit, by Zermelo set theory with Choice, ZC, I mean the theory with the same language and axioms as ZFC except not Foundation (also called Regularity) and with the axiom scheme of Separation instead of Replacement. By Global Choice I mean adding a new function symbol $ F$ and an axiom:$ \forall v[v\neq\emptyset \rightarrow F(v)\in v]$ .

It is known that the axiom of Global Choice gives a conservative extension of Zermelo Frankel set theory with Choice (ZFC). The proof I know is by Haim Gaifman in his “Local and Global Choice Functions” (Israeli J. of Math v. 22 nos. 3-4, 1975, pp. 257–265. And there is one I have not worked through which uses forcing by Ulrich Felgner “Comparison of the axioms of local and universal choice” Funda. Math. 71, 1971, pp. 43-62. Both seem to require the idea of the rank of a set. Maybe one can be adapted to work for ZC, but I do not see it.

Or is there some other proof? Or a disproof?

High school homework help global geography research paper on dog behavior

Login or register to post comments custom essay inurl node do my personal statement

Best Essay Custom Writing Service


Essay Writing Service by Professionals – SEE MORE

Breakingviews TV Carry trades Woman, 44, had a STROKE while 'nearing orgasm' when her partner was…

High school homework help global geography research paper on dog behavior

MyLead – A Global Affiliate Network Distinguishes By Innovative! Over 600 Campaign!

Say “hello” to MyLead

We would like to introduce to you MyLead – an innovative affiliate network from Poland. We have already achieved a lot on the local business market and we are now also available globally.

MyLead – A Global Affiliate Network Distinguishes By Innovative! Over 600 Campaign!