VBA Posição de array de Variant para String

Bom dia,

Tenho no Excel uma pesquisa que retorna um array de variant preenchido com o endereço completo dos arquivos encontrados.
Preciso passar cada posição do array para uma string, estou tentando usar um laço For…Next para passar cada posição do array para uma string com a função CStr() mas um erro de tipos incompatíveis e retornado.
Segue o pedaço do código:

For i = LBound(vArray) To UBound(vArray)             On Error Resume Next             strFile = CStr(vArray(i))             Set myDoc = wdApp.Documents.Open(Filename:=strFile, ReadOnly:=True, AddToRecentFiles:=False, Visible:=False)             .Cells(i, 1).Value = myDoc.txtNome.Text             .Cells(i, 2).Value = myDoc.txtNis.Text             .Cells(i, 3).Value = myDoc.txtCpf.Text             .Cells(i, 4).Value = myDoc.txtEnd.Text             .Cells(i, 5).Value = myDoc.txtCep.Text             .Cells(i, 6).Value = myDoc.Combobox1.Value             myDoc.Close SaveChanges:=False         Next i 

O que estou fazendo errado, existe alguma outra maneira de fazer este procedimento?

Desde já obrigado!!!

Is the Gritty Realism variant incompatible with the classic dungeon crawl?

The variant Gritty Realism rule presented in the DMG (see p. 267) changes short rests from 1 hour to 8 hours, and long rests from 8 hours to 7 days. Its description suggests, casually and without elaboration, that

[t]his approach encourages the characters to spend time out of the dungeon.

In other words, 5e’s designers evidently thought the rule’s ramifications would increase the difficulty of dungeons enough to warrant comment, yet unhelpfully declined to articulate why. Given that dungeons are a namesake of the game, this is a regrettable oversight, even for a variant rule. DMs and players considering the rule are left guessing as to what pitfalls they should expect — e.g., what game mechanics are made more complicated by the design principles informing an archetypal dungeon-based adventure. For 5e veterans, that might not be a heavy lift, but those with less (or no) experience face potential frustration.

A number of Q&As here on RPG.SE have discussed Gritty Realism, e.g.:

  • What game mechanics may be inadvertently broken by changing the time required for resting?
  • How can I reduce the number of encounters per day without throwing off game balance?
  • How do the activity limitations for a long rest work in the Gritty Realism variant?

However, none have meaningfully examined why — or even whether — dungeons might be especially problematic in a game using Gritty Realism.

Given the game mechanics implicated, is the DMG‘s observation that Gritty Realism discourages dungeon crawling really accurate? Might it be overstated? Might it be understated, such that groups primarily interested in dungeon-delving should absolutely eschew Gritty Realism?

The best ux alternative in designing variant of a product on dashboard

I was wondering what would be the best way to display variant when user clicks on “Add Variant”. I already designed two alternatives: display it in ascending order or descending order. I have tested it to internal stakeholders but I still hesitate because the results are 50:50, either they chose Alternative-A or Alternative-B.

On Alternative A, when user clicks “add variant” then it will appear in ascending order. After user filled the product variant name, the variant 1 will be automatically changed based on the product variant name, so on. The latest variant will be placed on bottom. Example:

variant 1

variant 2

variant 3 [this is the latest]

Alternative A: enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

On Alternative B, when user clicks “add variant” then it will appear in descending order. After user filled the product variant name, the variant 1 will be automatically changed based on the product variant name, so on. But, the latest variant will be placed on top. Example:

variant 3 [this is the latest]

variant 2

variant 1

Alternative B: enter image description here

enter image description here

enter image description here

I would be glad if someone could give me an opinion and a strong justification to which best ux alternative from those two options. On the other hand, I would like to put an indicator state to the latest variant but I still have no idea how to present it. Maybe you could offer me an idea regarding the indicator state. Thank you in advance!

Woocommerce: Remove variant options from admin new order email

I would like to ask for some help / advice. Currently, we use the admin new order email as a picking list that gets printed off, but we now have an average of 3 variations per product and the printed name is now getting rather long, as per the format below.

what I would like to ask help for is to determine which hooks control the naming so I can remove all the variant elements, (leaving standard name and sku) and to then apply it to the admin email only.

My initial thought is to do something like the below, but I cannot see how i can determine if it is an admin email or not as I don’t have access to $ email..

Any help is appreciated.

 function variation_title_not_include_attributes( $  boolean ){   if (  is_email() )  { $  boolean = false;  return $  boolean;  } return true; } 
Current Sample output:  Test product (Test SKU) •   Variant 1:  Variant 1 Option •   Variant 2:  Variant 2 Option •   Variant 3:  Variant 3 Option 

Is Variant Human Monk with Tavern Brawler treating improvised weapons as monk weapons OP? DnD 5e

a friend of mine wants to play a Variant Human with the Tavern Brawler feat and asked me, if he could use improvised Weapons as monk weapons.

I personally haven’t played a monk, or the feat tavern brawler. Does anyone see this bringing an unfixable balancing problem to the table?

Would love more experienced people to hear why you would, or wouldn’t allow this and maybe solutions for balancing issues.

Thank you guys in advance!

Computing the sum of an infinite series as a variant of a geometric series

I came across the following series when computing the covariance of a transform of a bivariate Gaussian random vector via Hermite polynomials and Mehler’s expansion:

$ $ S = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{\rho^n}{n^{1/6}} $ $ for $ \vert \rho \vert < 1$ . We know that $ S$ must be finite and satisfy $ $ S \le \rho (1-\rho)^{-1} $ $ since the original series is dominated by $ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \rho^n$ .

However, there is a catch if we use for $ S$ the upper bound $ \rho (1-\rho)^{-1}$ , which tends to $ \infty$ when $ \rho \to 1-$ . This happens when the two marginal random variables in the Gaussian vector are almost surely, positively linearly dependent (asymptotically).

So, the target is to obtain a good upper bound, much better than $ \rho (1-\rho)^{-1}$ when we restrict $ \rho$ to be away from $ 1$ , to reduce the effect of $ \rho \to 1-$ . In other words, let $ 1-\rho = \delta$ for some fixed $ \delta \in (0,1)$ , what is a better upper bound for $ S$ ?

Because of the scaling term $ n^{-1/6}$ that induces a divergent series $ \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} n^{-1/6}$ , probably not much improvement should be expected. I have Googled but did not find an illuminating technique for this. Any pointer or help is appreciated. Thank you.

not sure how to breathe life into mate 8 64gb dual sim variant

I’m at a loss here, i have nougat on my mate mate 8 but i completely forgot that you had to root nougat in a particular way. Anyway, i don’t have access to erecovery, power+volUPvolDown doesn’t work and i can’t get access to fastboot. The only thing i do get is power to the screen and my ‘your phone is unlocked and can’t be trusted blah blah’ message.

I need to flash a recovery.img, system.img and any other relevant img. How can i do this with the phone in this state?

Dealing with test condition ‘=’ for a while loop when determining a bound function/loop variant

The following is the definition of what a bound function for a while loop must satisfy:

1.an integer-valued, total function of some of the inputs, variables and global data that are defined when the loop is reached.

2.When the loop body is executed, the value of this function is decreased by at least one before the loop’s test is checked again, if at all.

3.If the value of this function is ≤ 0 and the loop’s test is checked then the test fails (ending this execution of the loop).

Given a while loop as such,

While (j<= n) {.....; j++} 

I am trying to find a bound function/loop variant for this simple while loop.

n-j is not a loop function since point (3) would fail. and n-j-1 is not a loop function since the loop would not run initially if n=j (since n-j-1=-1>=f(i,n)), and I am not sure if the latter is a total function due to the presence of a ‘-1’.

How do I deal with the ‘=’ in the ‘<=’ to determine a bound function that satisfies the while loop?

How do spell slot recovery abilities work with the Variant: Spell Points system?

I am considering using the Variant: Spell Points system from page 288-289 of the DMG. I asked a related question on the overall balance of this rule. This question is more focused on the mechanics of implementing it.


Druids and Wizards have abilities that allow them to recovery spell slots during a shot rest. For example the Arcane Recovery feature states:

[…] Once per day when you finish a short rest, you can choose expended spell slots to recover. The spell slots can have a combined level that is equal to or less than half your wizard level (rounded up), and none of the slots can be 6th level or higher.

For example, if you’re a 4th-level wizard, you can recover up to two levels worth of spell slots. You can recover either a 2nd-level slot or two 1st-level slots.

How does this feature work when using the Variant: Spell Points system?

Initially I thought you would simply regain the equivalent number of spell points to the slots you could recover. However, the conversion is somewhat ambiguous due to the flexible nature of the recovery.

To use the example from the text, a 4th level wizard can recover 2 levels worth of spells. If they recover a 2nd level slot that is equivalent to 3 spell points. If instead they choose to recover 2 1st level spell slots that would be equivalent to 4 spell points. What is the correct way to handle this?