标签：#r

GitHub热门项目 | | Stars: 6,237 | 17 stars today | 语言: Python

GitHub热门项目 | Open source DocuSign alternative. Create, fill, and sign digital documents ✍️ | Stars: 17,719 | 152 stars today | 语言: Ruby

GitHub热门项目 | Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format | Stars: 71,510 | 11 stars today | 语言: C++

GitHub热门项目 | | Stars: 1,499 | 37 stars today | 语言: TypeScript

GitHub热门项目 | Master programming by recreating your favorite technologies from scratch. | Stars: 526,862 | 1,070 stars today | 语言: Markdown

Overview lead-quorum was a strong pilot repo because it was small enough to reason about and real enough to fail honestly. It has: repo-local Python environment ownership pinned dependency installation env bootstrap from example truth a deterministic local test surface live external verification a local web runtime a distributed demo path a Docker build lane That is exactly the kind of repo where a contract can look clean while still hiding real setup and execution drift. Why this repo mattered The useful pressure here was not “can Ota run one Python command.” The useful pressure was whether Ota could stay truthful when the repo itself owns: the .venv the dependency install lane the local executable path the runtime listener truth If Ota probes or fulfills those in the wrong order, the contract is not trustworthy even if the repo itself is valid. That is what made lead-quorum valuable. What the contract now models The final contract is explicit about the repo’s real setup split. Setup is not one opaque shell step. It is three different ownership surfaces: copy .env from .env.example only if missing create the repo-local virtual environment hydrate dependencies through typed uv requirements-file installation That looks like this in the contract: setup : aggregate : tasks : - setup:env - setup:venv - setup:deps setup:env : action : kind : copy_if_missing from : .env.example to : .env setup:venv : action : kind : ensure_virtualenv path : .venv python : " 3.12" setup:deps : prepare : kind : dependency_hydration medium : package_dependencies source : kind : uv cwd : . mode : pip_requirements requirements_file : requirements.txt The contract also keeps verification and external-runtime claims separate: verify for deterministic local validation live for Gemini-backed end-to-end testing app for the local web service distributed for the A2A demo path That matters because a working local scoring test and a live distributed runtime are not the same readiness claim. What lead-q

Modbus RTU over RS-485 is the serial workhorse of industrial field wiring — the variant you'll meet when connecting an ESP32 directly to an energy meter, PLC, VFD, or temperature transmitter over a wired bus. This tutorial walks through wiring the hardware, installing a library, and flashing working RTU master code. What You'll Build A Modbus RTU master on ESP32 that polls holding registers from an RS-485 slave device over a wired bus. An understanding of register types, addressing, and the reliability practices that separate a demo from a production deployment. Prerequisites Arduino IDE (or PlatformIO) with the ESP32 board package installed. An ESP32 dev board, or an industrial ESP32 controller with a built-in RS-485 transceiver such as the NORVI X — this saves you from wiring a separate MAX485 module. A Modbus RTU slave device (energy meter, sensor, or PLC). Basic familiarity with the Arduino C++ syntax and serial monitor debugging. A 60-Second Modbus Primer Modbus is a master–slave protocol dating back to 1979. One master polls up to 247 slave devices, each with a unique address (1–247). Data lives in four register types, and knowing which one you need is half the battle: Register Type Access Width Typical Use Coils (0x) Read/Write 1-bit Relay outputs, digital controls Discrete Inputs (1x) Read only 1-bit Digital sensor inputs, switch states Input Registers (3x) Read only 16-bit Analog sensor values, process data Holding Registers (4x) Read/Write 16-bit Setpoints, configuration parameters Modbus RTU over RS-485 Step 1 — Wire the Hardware The ESP32's UART pins output 3.3V TTL logic, but RS-485 uses a differential voltage signal — so you need a TTL-to-RS-485 transceiver (typically a MAX485 or MAX3485 chip) between the ESP32 and the bus. UART TX → transceiver DI (driver input) UART RX ← transceiver RO (receiver output) A spare GPIO → transceiver DE and RE tied together (direction control) Transceiver A/B terminals → the RS-485 A+/B− pair on your slave device Skip th

✍️ This post was written with two hands. The story — the first part — is Murilo's, lived and told by the person who was there. The technical manual , at the end, was written with AI. The split is intentional and marked in the text. Nothing hidden about the seam: part is human, part is machine, and the reader sees both. If you've ever managed or logged into a web server and never set up SSH keys, it's because you don't yet know the real risks of a break-in — and that's okay. Until you find out what can happen. Logging into a server over SSH with a username and password is like locking the front door of a house that faces the street, with nobody keeping watch. Anyone can try as many combinations as they want, freely. And setting this up takes almost as much time as typing a username and password — and it makes getting into the server much faster and easier afterwards. Ignorant of best practices, I managed my servers for a long time by typing: ssh user@server-ip password That nearly cost me dearly, the day I found out my server had been broken into. After that incident, I realized just how vulnerable a username and password are on SSH. Today I can't say I sleep soundly — no system is completely break-in proof — but I sleep a lot better (and honestly, I always slept well, until I started managing servers). Waking up on a fine Sunday morning to do some maintenance on the server, and finding out it was broken into through the front door because you left a combination padlock facing the street — that is not the kind of surprise I'd wish on anyone. I have a degree in Law. I worked for 15 years in the legal field at a public institution, until I decided to venture into the world of programming. And where did I end up? Managing systems at the institution I work for, after spending some time building automations in Python. Managing systems wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I wanted to learn to code and understand the world of programming. But that opportunity ended up tea

Justif is a drop-in JavaScript library that progressively enhances web pages to TeX-level text justification. Installation is a single <script> line, standard text and accessibility affordances are unchanged, and users with JS disabled get native browser rendering. I made justif because I've long been a fan of justified text. I think it looks clean and elegant, and makes reading more enjoyable. But bad justification is the opposite, with gaping spaces that distract me to the point of making the

Introduction A Continuation of Shadow SCADA Terminal Velocity begins where Shadow SCADA left off — at the edge where digital audits meet the physical world. In the previous article, we explored how hidden infrastructures reveal themselves through aerial recon, magnetic anomalies, and environmental signals. Now we move deeper: into the physics of sensing, the light‑based pathways of diodes and photodiodes, and the high‑spec tools that transform invisible signals into readable intelligence. Modern audits are no longer limited to dashboards and logs. They extend into light, magnetic fields, environmental distortions, and sensor‑level truth — domains that traditional processes never touch. Section 1 – Diodes and Photodiodes: The First Gate of Physical Signals In modern audits, everything starts at the physical layer — where electricity and light move before any software or dashboard exists. Two tiny components sit at that gate: diodes and photodiodes. They look similar, but they do very different jobs. What is a diode? · One‑way valve for electricity: A diode lets electric current pass in one direction only, like a one‑way street. · Why this matters for security: Diodes are used to make sure information can leave a system but cannot come back in through the same path (for example, in SCADA or critical networks). · Simple image: Think of a diode as a door that only opens outward. You can exit, but nobody can enter through that door. What is a photodiode? · Sensor for light: A photodiode doesn’t control current—it detects light and turns that light into an electrical signal. · Where it’s used: In cameras, light sensors, security systems, and tools that “listen” to the environment through light. · Simple image: Think of a photodiode as a tiny eye that sees light and tells the system, “Something is shining here.” The key difference (in one sentence) · Diode = controls flow. · Photodiode = senses light. Diodes are about blocking or allowing. Photodiodes are about seeing and

When building Cypress automation that interacts with AWS services, the first step is verifying that your test framework can successfully authenticate and communicate with your AWS account. In this article, you'll learn how to connect Cypress to AWS and perform a simple authentication test using AWS Security Token Service (STS) and the GetCallerIdentity API. This approach helps confirm that: AWS credentials are correctly configured. Cypress can invoke AWS SDK operations through Node.js tasks. The automation environment is connected to the expected AWS account. Establishing this connection first provides a solid foundation before automating interactions with services such as AWS Lambda, Amazon S3, Amazon DynamoDB, Amazon SNS, or Amazon SQS. Prerequisites Before getting started, ensure you have: Node.js installed A Cypress project Valid AWS credentials: AWS Access Key ID AWS Secret Access Key AWS Session Token (if using temporary credentials) AWS Region Note:If you're running Cypress in an AWS environment (such as AWS CodeBuild, an EC2 instance with an IAM role, or GitHub Actions using OpenID Connect), you may not need to provide credentials manually. The AWS SDK can automatically retrieve credentials from the execution environment. Step 1: Install the AWS SDK Install the AWS STS client package: npm install @aws-sdk/client-sts For this connectivity test, we only need the AWS Security Token Service (STS) client. The package provides: STSClient – Creates a client for communicating with AWS STS. GetCallerIdentityCommand – Returns details about the authenticated AWS identity associated with the configured credentials. Step 2: Configure AWS Credentials For local development, create or update your cypress.env.json file. { "AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID" : "" , "AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY" : "" , "AWS_SESSION_TOKEN" : "" , "AWS_REGION" : "" } Populate the file with your AWS credentials. Example: { "AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID" : "your-access-key" , "AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY" : "your-secret-key" , "AWS_SES

Well-structured status lines in vim and shell prompts with version control symbols are a nice quality-of-life improvement. Unfortunately, not all monospace fonts come with the necessary PowerLine glyphs. For example, my favourite font is Operator Mono , and it too doesn’t have PowerLine symbols built in. Thanks to the NerdFonts font patcher , I was able to generate a font variant that has the necessary symbols. I simply ran the tool as a Docker container in my fonts directory: $ mkdir HCo_OperatorMonoSSmNF $ docker run --rm -v $PWD /HCo_OperatorMonoSSm/OpenType:/in \ -v $PWD /HCo_OperatorMonoSSmNF:/out \ nerdfonts/patcher --windows --powerline --powerlineextra Now my spaceship shell prompt sparks even more joy.

Part: 4 of 18 About this series This series documents the engineering evolution of a production-ready algorithmic trading platform in Python. It focuses on architecture, state management, execution, real-time data processing, persistence, and the engineering decisions that transformed a simple trading bot into a production-ready platform. In Part 3: Building a Production-Ready Position Manager for Algorithmic Trading , I described the component responsible for maintaining persistent position state throughout the entire trade lifecycle. Read Part 3 here: https://dev.to/pydevtop/building-a-production-ready-position-manager-for-algorithmic-trading-55n4 The Position Manager could remember every open position. The next challenge was deciding what should happen to those positions as market conditions continuously changed. Project Website This article is part of the engineering story behind the Bybit Signal Trading Platform . If you'd like to learn more about the project, see additional screenshots, features and technical details, visit: https://py-dev.top/application-software/bybit-signal-trading-bot The Problem Was Never Stop Loss If someone had asked me during the first weeks of development where the Stop Loss logic should live, I wouldn't have hesitated. Inside the Trade Execution Engine. Where else? The engine already received TradingView webhooks. It validated incoming requests. It calculated Take Profit. It opened positions. Adding one more calculation felt completely natural. The implementation looked something like this. signal = receive_signal () validate ( signal ) entry = execute_order ( signal ) stop_loss = calculate_stop_loss ( entry ) take_profit = calculate_take_profit ( entry ) Simple. Readable. Everything related to opening a trade existed in one place. At that moment there was absolutely no reason to introduce another component. There was only one trading pair. Only one open position. No persistence. No restart recovery. No Break Even. No Trailing Stop.

I run a pipeline that generates explainer articles. LLM in the middle, structured output, published in several languages. It had been running for a while and the articles looked good: clean layout, a chart, and near the top of each one a confident little box with a statistic. Something in the shape of "68% of people never change the default." A number, a source, an authoritative ring to it. Not one of those numbers had been researched. The pipeline had never looked up a single statistic in its life. It asked the model for a number and printed whatever came back. I did not find this through a clever eval. I found it while cleaning up something unrelated and actually reading the prompt. The field that forced a lie The output schema had a required field. statistic.text and statistic.source , described in the prompt as an "eye-catching stat" for the top of the article. Required. Every article had to have one. The prompt also, helpfully, told the model what to do when it did not have a real number. It said to round to a safe order of magnitude. And it said to strip the year off the source, so the article would look evergreen instead of dated. Read that back slowly. The instructions were: always produce a statistic, make up a plausible magnitude if you have to, and remove the one piece of metadata that would let anyone check it. That is not a prompt that occasionally allows a hallucination. That is a prompt that requires one, every single time the model does not happen to know a real figure. So it produced them, confidently, in every language, each wearing a real-sounding source: a named institute, an industry association, a government statistics office. None of it had been looked up when it was written. This was content people actually act on, which is exactly the category where being wrong is not a rounding error. There was a second engine doing the same thing in the chart code. The block that generated the data visualization asked the model for "actual statistics from

How I went from toggling a single GPIO pin to deploying intelligent, low-power firmware on the edge — and the lessons that shaped me along the way. The first program I ever ran on a microcontroller did exactly one thing: it blinked an LED. No operating system. No framework. No safety net. Just my code, a register, and a clock ticking a few million times a second. When that LED finally blinked at the rate I intended — not too fast, not stuck on — I felt something I hadn't felt writing software before. On a bare-metal system, nothing happens unless you make it happen. There's no runtime quietly cleaning up after you. That mix of total control and total responsibility is what pulled me into embedded systems, and it's the same thread that eventually led me to running machine learning models on the edge. This is the story of that journey — from a single blinking pin to intelligent devices that sense, decide, and act on their own. The Bare-Metal Beginning Bare-metal firmware is where you learn what a computer actually is. When you write to a memory-mapped register to toggle a GPIO, or configure a UART peripheral one bit at a time, there's no abstraction hiding the hardware from you. You read the datasheet. You read the reference manual. You get the clock configuration wrong, and nothing works — no error message, just silence. Then you fix it, and suddenly bytes are streaming out of a pin at exactly the baud rate you configured. Most of my early growth happened writing low-level peripheral drivers — UART, SPI, I2C, GPIO, ADC — on ARM Cortex-M platforms. These are the unglamorous building blocks, but they teach you the discipline embedded work demands: Every byte and every milliwatt matters. On a resource-constrained MCU, you don't get to be careless with memory or power. Timing is a first-class citizen. An interrupt that fires 50 microseconds late can break the whole system. The hardware is always right. If your code and the oscilloscope disagree, the oscilloscope wins. Th

I sat the Claude Certified Architect exam expecting questions about model parameters, context limits, and API flags. I got something else. The exam barely tests trivia. It tests judgment: given a broken agent and four plausible fixes, which one actually addresses the root cause? The interesting part was how few ideas the whole thing rests on. The same handful of rules kept deciding the "right" answer, and they are the same rules that decide whether an agent holds up once real users touch it. Below are the twelve I kept running into, plus the four traps that look like solutions and are not. This is my own study material, derived from publicly available exam guidance. It reflects how I build, not an official Anthropic position. The twelve rules Enforce determinism in code, not in prompts If a rule has to fire every single time, it is not a job for a prompt. A prompt is a suggestion the model usually follows. "Usually" is not a guarantee. When you need a guarantee, put it in a hook, a gate, or an allowlist. Code enforces. Prose requests. Pick the cheapest fix that hits the root cause Before you build a subsystem, try the levers that cost minutes: a sharper tool description, an explicit acceptance criterion, a config change. Most "we need to build X" moments dissolve once you test the cheap fix first. Reach for the classifier only after the one-line change fails. Bad tool selection? Start with the descriptions When an agent keeps picking the wrong tool, the description is almost always the culprit, not the model. Tool descriptions are the primary signal the model uses to choose. Rewrite them to say exactly when to use the tool and when not to, before you go anywhere near few-shot examples. Over-engineering is almost always the wrong answer Narrowing scope and improving the prompt beat a new subsystem far more often than engineers expect. Every subsystem you add is one more thing to debug, monitor, and keep in sync. Complexity is a cost you pay forever, not once. A bigge