Wrong No 2 Full Movie Download 720p
Fortun Bawa
I know this has been addressed in the past, but I can't seem to resolve this issue. It may also be related to another issue I'm experiencing. I have an Excel spreadsheet that I update several time a month. When I access the file from dropbox on my desktop, everything is current (last modified date 02/01/2024). When I access the file through the app on my phone or tablet, the file is NOT current (last modified date 10/12/2023). Any help would be greatly appreciated. I'm a long time user and this is the first issue I've ever encountered.
Did this post help you? If so, give it a Like below to let us know.
Need help with something else? Ask me a question!
Find Tips & Tricks Discover more ways to use Dropbox here!
Interested in Community Groups? Click here to join!
Clearing the cache has resolved the problem. Thank you. I'm not as tech savvy with tablets and mobile phones as I am with a desktop, so I didn't even think about cache (actually had to Google how to clear cache).
I have one other xlsx file that does not generate the error and opens without issue. The password protected file is not even 1MB, so I'm now pretty sure that it's the password that causes the "something went wrong"!
About half the time I travel - which is not that much - meals are entered into Concur on the wrong date. For example, Monday night's dinner is recorded on Tuesday, and when combined with Tuesday's meals causes me to go over the per diem. When I get the AMEX bill the dates are recorded correctly, so it's the dates they are recorded in Concur that are incorrect.
Some meals on Sunday appeared on my AMEX bill with that date, but appeared in Concur with Monday's date resulting in exceeding the per diem for Monday. The only way to resolve this is to mark it as a personal expense and resubmit it as reimburseable.
We have similar experiences and our workaround is to delete the expense entry that came from the card transaction (and delete the transaction from available transactions) and create a new expense entry with the correct date. To do this you'd need to enable the "Delete" option in your configuration. Hope this helps.
In my case my dinner of April 12th appear on the 13th so now it says that I over limit my expenses on the 13th. And I can not modify the expense date , although I have the ticket with the 12th date on it.
@Cervantes I suggest asking your direct manager about this. Without being able to change the date, you are a bit stuck. See if your manager will allow you to change the expense type to something else. That is really the only way to get around the hard stop of being over the limit. If your manager agrees, then be sure to use the Comment field to explain that the expense was actually a meal and the transaction date is preventing you from submitting.
There should be an option within the administrative settings for the Card Program that can "Allow employees to edit the Transaction Date for company card transactions". This would allow you to change the date of the charge to match the actual date of the expense, and align with your limits.
Depending on your setup (if company pays bank directly for corporate card charges or pays to employee, who then pays the bank) this could work better than the option to delete an expense and manually re-key it, as then it would no longer show up as a corporate card expense and could potentially be paid incorrectly.
Another potential workaround could be to classify the charge into a Misc. expense type, and then choose to itemize it. Then in the itemization you would enter the appropriate date & meal expense type. Then the system would only see the meal expense reflected on the proper date.
Note: When trying to import the list I manage to get to the next step where I can preview the list and also mark that everyone on the list accepts marketing. It's only after that step when I press "Import" that I get the message that something went wrong.
I tried all of those techniques and nothing worked for me, so it looks like i will cancel my email campaigns with squarespace as i cannot do this basic function, smh.
Works fine in Mailchimp...
I just exported a maillist from one squarespacesite and setting up a new site on new domain, and when I try to import I get the same "import failed" message. Should be no problem to import when the export is made from squarespace.
You also can't import a new email to a mailing list "individually". "Something went Wrong".
What's the process in terms of getting help from Squarespace for this fundamental and time-sensitive issue?
Same problem here as well. Squarespace should really look into this. We only get this problem from Excel-files. So we tell customers to copy the list from Excel, paste it into a Google sheet - and then import the downloaded csv-file from Google. But this is not good enough - and should be solved asap.
One of the above suggestions worked for me. Like all of you, I was getting the "something went wrong" message on both the "List" and "Individual" import options. So, I went to my CSV file, I made sure my sheet was named "sheet 1" and then I saved the document. Once saved, I went to the folder where the file was located and renamed the entire file "maillist1". When I went to import the list again, it worked. I tried it again on a second type of list with other names and emails, and it worked again there too.
Programmer B feels honor-bound to retain the existing abstraction, but since isn't exactly the same for every case, they alter the code to take a parameter, and then add logic to conditionally do the right thing based on the value of that parameter.
Existing code exerts a powerful influence. Its very presence argues that it is both correct and necessary. We know that code represents effort expended, and we are very motivated to preserve the value of this effort. And, unfortunately, the sad truth is that the more complicated and incomprehensible the code, i.e. the deeper the investment in creating it, the more we feel pressure to retain it (the "sunk cost fallacy"). It's as if our unconscious tell us "Goodness, that's so confusing, it must have taken ages to get right. Surely it's really, really important. It would be a sin to let all that effort go to waste."
When you appear in this story in step 8 above, this pressure may compel you to proceed forward, that is, to implement the new requirement by changing the existing code. Attempting to do so, however, is brutal. The code no longer represents a single, common abstraction, but has instead become a condition-laden procedure which interleaves a number of vaguely associated ideas. It is hard to understand and easy to break.
This removes both the abstraction and the conditionals, and reduces each caller to only the code it needs. When you rewind decisions in this way, it's common to find that although each caller ostensibly invoked a shared abstraction, the code they were running was fairly unique. Once you completely remove the old abstraction you can start anew, re-isolating duplication and re-extracting abstractions.
I've seen problems where folks were trying valiantly to move forward with the wrong abstraction, but having very little success. Adding new features was incredibly hard, and each success further complicated the code, which made adding the next feature even harder. When they altered their point of view from "I must preserve our investment in this code" to "This code made sense for a while, but perhaps we've learned all we can from it," and gave themselves permission to re-think their abstractions in light of current requirements, everything got easier. Once they inlined the code, the path forward became obvious, and adding new features become faster and easier.
The moral of this story? Don't get trapped by the sunk cost fallacy. If you find yourself passing parameters and adding conditional paths through shared code, the abstraction is incorrect. It may have been right to begin with, but that day has passed. Once an abstraction is proved wrong the best strategy is to re-introduce duplication and let it show you what's right. Although it occasionally makes sense to accumulate a few conditionals to gain insight into what's going on, you'll suffer less pain if you abandon the wrong abstraction sooner rather than later.
The 2nd Edition contains 3 new chapters and is about 50% longer than the 1st. Also, because 99 Bottles of OOP is about object-oriented design in general rather than any specific language, this time around we created separate books that are technically identical, but use different programming languages for the examples.
c80f0f1006