SharePoint 2019 OnPremise: stop inheritance of permissions Inheritance in subsites

The site configuration is like this: MainSite -> SubSite.

Permissions on MainSite

enter the description of the image here

The user (tsp5070_ex_farm) is also added to Style Resource Readers.

enter the description of the image here

I set the permissions to stop inheriting and the user added "Edit permission" in the subsite.

enter the description of the image here

In the web application -> SubSite when I logged in:

  • in modern view you are still asked for credential

enter the description of the image here

  • The classic view did not ask for a credential, but I was p. Home page where it was not possible to switch to classic mode, so you were still asked for a credential

enter the description of the image here

Why do you still ask me to log in once I succeed? What am i missing?

Inheritance ID document set – SharePoint stack exchange

A simple question but probably a complex answer :]
Is there any way that allows me to share a unique identification information that is common between the "Set" and each "document" that is recorded in the set?
Ideally without development.

Thank you very much to all.
Regards,
Tzelos

c ++ – Template-based inheritance – Trying to understand "Inheritance is the base class of evil"

Prepare:

So, there is a really interesting talk called "Inheritance is the base class of evil." (Basically, he tries to implement an inheritance hierarchy with templates, instead of live machinery, for faster runtime performance)

And it makes sense, but it didn't click completely. So, obviously, I implemented a simple version to experiment. The problem is that it still seems awkward to use, in practice.

Questions:

  1. If I intend to follow the same pattern as the talk, am I implementing it wrong?
  2. This pattern seems to require a redirect function for each function in the interface (in contrast to the "inherited" functions available for free.
    • contrast & # 39; Grid :: debug & # 39; vs & # 39; Grid :: to_json & # 39;
    • Is there any way to avoid this, with templates and without vtable / inheritance?
    • yes, interface.impl.to_json () is available, but this seems like an ugly solution …
  3. Given all of the above, is there a better way to do this?

Code:

    // interface.hpp
    #include 
    #include 
    template
    class Terrain {
    public:
        T& impl;
        Terrain(T& _ref) : impl(_ref) {}

        void debug() const { impl.debug(); }
    };
    class Grid {
    public:
        void debug() const {
            std::cerr << "    debug: gridn";
        }

        string to_json() const;
    };
    class Tree {
      public:
        void debug() const {
          std::cerr << "    debug: gridn";
        }

        ///! brief outputs a serialization string of this->reference
        string to_json() const;
    };
    int main() { 
        std::cerr << "Case  1:n";
        Grid g1;
        Interface i1(g1);
        i1.debug();

        std::cerr << "Case  2:n";
        Tree t2;
        Interface i2(t2);
        i2.debug();
    }

Footnotes:

Repl.it Version:

(1) (https://repl.it/repls/UntrueStupendousLearning)

"Inheritance is the base class of evil." Sean Parent

(2) (https://channel9.msdn.com/Events/GoingNative/2013/Inheritance-Is-The-Base-Class-of-Evil)

The StackOverflow response that started this whole disaster:

(3) (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/318064/how-do-you-declare-an-interface-in-c/17299151#17299151)

Object-oriented: Python interfaces, multiple inheritance versus a home solution

I am writing a Python framework. To ensure that a class has some properties, I do basic "interface" classes such as:

class BananaContainer:
    def __init__(self):
        self._bananas = ()
    @property
    def bananas(self):
        return self._bananas

So, if an object is supposed to be a container of bananas, simply
derive it from BananaContainer.

A potential problem arises with objects that are multiple containers. In Myself
team we wonder if multiple inheritance is adequate
Way to go or if there are some alternative solutions.

  • Is it right to have an object that inherits both? BananaContainer Y AppleContainer for example ?
    • Can you hit us back later with problems like the order of resolution of the method or name collisions? (We can be careful not to have similar properties such as .name for example, we would like to limit those interfaces to the minimum required, nothing more)

A colleague proposes a system of "capabilities" based on composition rather than multiple inheritance. I have doubts about the real advantages of his method; look down:

class BaseCapabilities:
    EXISTING_CAPABILITIES = {"banana": BananaContainer, "apple": AppleContainer, ...}

    def get_capability(self, name):
        if name in self.capabilities():
            return EXISTING_CAPABILITIES(name)(self)
    def capabilities(self):
        # should return a list of capabilities
        raise NotImplementedError

Each object would have to derive only from 1 class, but then it must
implement capacity machinery:

 class MyContainer(BaseCapabilities):
     def capabilities(self):
         return ("banana", "apple")

Then, within the framework it is possible to verify if an object has the desired capacity and obtain an instance of the container class …
This is to avoid multiple inheritance considered harmful.

My proposal is to go through multiple inheritance and use isinstance(obj, BananaContainer) for example to know if obj It is a banana container.

I would be very grateful to get help in making a decision on this issue.

dnd 3.5e – What are the exact rules for the Polymorph spell considering its Alter Self spell inheritance?

The first point of confusion with the spell. Polymorphic organism is clarifying how exactly your text interacts with that of Alter Self. To that end, the combination of the two spells is shown below as if Polymorphic organism It was written as an independent spell instead of a derivative one. This was accomplished by breaking both spells line by line, and then replacing lines of Alter Self with the respective lines of Polymorphic organism, in addition to changing lines of Alter Self to refer to "subject / it" instead of "you / his" as appropriate.

Polymorphic organism It begins with the line, "This spell works as an alter self, except that …" Usually, there are two separate ideologies on how to interpret this statement: "replace" and "add or replace." For the first, any individual element of Alter Self affected by a rule of Polymorphic organism It is completely stripped and completely replaced by the new rules. For the latter, the language of Polymorphic organism it simply adds to Alter Self unless an acute conflict is created, in which case only the language in conflict is removed from Alter Self.

This answer uses the "replace" interpretation of Polymorphic organism vs. Alter Self instead of the interpretation "add or replace". The interpretation of "add or replace" leads to strange rules that do not make much sense from a player's perspective, such as arbitrarily limiting a normal-sized creature, of which there are no standard player races, so that they become even more Small but does not affect the size options. So, in all cases where a Polymorphic organism rule refers to something directly governed by Alter Self, the relevant Alter Self the language has been completely discarded and replaced by the language found in Polymorphic organism.

Polymorphic organism

Transmutation
Level: Sor / Wiz 4
Components: V, S, M
Audition time: 1 standard action
Distance: I touched
Objective: Willing living creature touched
Duration: 1 min / Level (D)
Saving Throw: Any
Spell Resistance: Do not

You change the willing subject to another form of living creature. It cannot cause a subject to assume a smaller form than Fina, nor can it cause a subject to assume a disembodied or gaseous form. The assumed form cannot have more hit dice than your thrower level (or the subject's HD, whichever is lower), up to a maximum of 15 HD at level 15. The new form may be of the same type as the subject or any of the following types: aberration, animal, dragon, fairy, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, exudate, plant or vermin.

When changing, the subject recovers the lost hit points as if he had rested overnight (although this healing does not restore the damage of temporary ability and provides other benefits of resting; and the change of back does not heal the subject anymore). The subject obtains the Force, Dexterity and Constitution scores in the new form, but retains his own Intelligence, Wisdom and Charisma scores. The class and level of the subject, hit points, alignment, base attack bonus and base rescue bonuses remain the same.

The subject retains all special attacks and supernatural qualities and spells in its normal form, except those that require a part of the body that the new form does not have (such as a mouth for a breath weapon or eyes for a look attack). The subject maintains all extraordinary special attacks and qualities derived from class levels, but loses any of its normal form that does not derive from class levels. He also wins all the extraordinary special attacks that the form possesses, but does not obtain the extraordinary special qualities that the new form possesses or any supernatural or spell-like abilities.

If the new form is able to speak, it can communicate normally. The subject retains any spell casting abilities he had in his original form, but the new form must be able to speak intelligibly (i.e. speak a language) to use verbal components and must have limbs capable of fine manipulation to use somatic components or materials

The subject acquires the physical qualities of the new form while retaining his own mind. Physical qualities include life size, worldly movement capabilities (such as burrows, climbing, walking, swimming and flying with wings, at a maximum speed of 120 feet to fly or 60 feet for movement without flight), natural armor bonus, natural weapons (such as claws, bites, etc.), racial skills bonuses, feats of racial bonus and any serious physical quality (presence or absence of wings, number of limbs, etc.). A body with additional limbs does not allow the subject to make more attacks (or attacks with two more advantageous weapons) than normal.

The subject does not obtain special qualities not mentioned above under physical qualities, such as dark vision, low light vision, blind sense, blind vision, rapid healing, regeneration, aroma, etc. The subject does not get any special supernatural attack, special qualities or spell abilities in the new way.

The type and subtype of the subject's creature (if applicable) change to match the new shape. The subject cannot take the form of a creature with a template, even if that template does not change the type or subtype of creature. The disembodied or gaseous creatures are immune to being polymorphs, and a creature with the form-changing subtype can return to its natural form as a standard action.

You can freely designate the minor physical qualities of the new form (such as hair color, hair texture and skin color) within normal ranges for such a creature. The significant physical qualities of the new form (such as height, weight and gender) are also under your control, but must be within the standards for the class of the new form. The subject effectively disguises himself as an average member of the race in the new way. If you use this spell to create a costume, you get a +10 bonus on your costume check.

When the change occurs, the subject's equipment, if any, remains worn or retained by the new form (if it is able to use or hold the item), or merges with the new form and stops working. When the subject returns to its true form, any object previously mixed in the new form reappears in the same location on its body that it previously occupied and becomes functional again. Any new item that the subject used in the assumed manner and that he cannot use in his normal form falls and falls at his feet; Everything that you can use in any form or carry in a part of the body common to both forms at the time of reversal is still maintained in the same way.

Any part of the body or piece of equipment that separates completely returns to its true form. If killed, the subject returns to its original form, although it remains dead.

With the spell more clearly defined, we can now go section by section to determine exactly what Polymorphic organism It really does, organized by paragraph:

Choose a legal form:

You change the subject arranged to. . .

  • At least fine size
  • It is not gaseous or incorporeal.
  • The hit dice must not be more than the minimum throwing level of the Polymorphic organism subject spell or hit dice, up to a maximum of 15
  • The assumed form can be the type of subject, or any of: aberration, animal, dragon, fairy, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, exudate, plant or vermin

Effect on subject hit points, attributes and statistics

When changing, the subject. . .

  • Heal the hit points as if resting one night, but no other benefit of night rest
  • Get Strength, Dexterity and Constitution scores in the new way
  • It retains its own intelligence, wisdom and charisma.
  • Keep your own class, level, hit points, alignment, base attack bonus and base save bonuses
    • Note that the "hit points" in this statement refer contextually to the hit dice of the target form / average hit points without any constitution modifier. For example, a subject that has polymorphic d4 hit dice on a type of magic beast will not be able to roll their hit points again to take advantage of d10 hit dice in that way, nor will their hit points be adjusted to match the average score. for such a creature (the number in brackets). In other words, they are the subject's hit points, regardless of their Constitution score. It is the opinion of this DM that Polymorph does no change how the Constitution attribute works. So, while the polymorph does not change the subject's hit points, it does change the subject's constitution modifier. Changes in the subject's Constitution score can alter the subject's hit points, even if the spell itself does not.

      If a character's Constitution score changes enough to alter its Constitution modifier, the character's life points also increase or decrease accordingly.

    • There is an alternative interpretation of Polymorphous The effect on hit points is that any possible change in the Constitution simply does not count towards the calculation of the hit point; the presence of Polymorphic organism Simply ignore completely to calculate life points. This can be considered under the "specific> general" clause, but it is the opinion of this DM that such an interpretation is ignoring the context of how Polymorphic organism He manages the rest of his skills and settings. There are no other effects of Polymorphic organism The spell adjusts the fundamental mechanics of the game in such a way, but it is a possible interpretation.
      • The alternative form includes such stipulation:

        The creature gains physical ability scores (Str, Dex, Con) in its new form. Keep mental ability scores (Int, Wis, Cha) in their original form. Apply changed physical ability score modifiers in all appropriate areas with one exception: the creature retains hit points in its original form despite any change in its Constitution.

Effect on the subject's special abilities

The subject retains everything. . .

  • Maintains supernatural (SU) and spell-like (SLA) abilities unless the relevant ability requires a body part that the subject does not have in the objective form
  • Subject maintains extraordinary abilities (EX) obtained from class levels
  • Subject loses extraordinary abilities (EX) of his normal racial form
  • The subject gains extraordinary special attacks (EX) in the objective way
  • The subject does no obtain any SU or SLA skills in the objective way
  • The subject does no obtain extraordinary special qualities in the objective way

Effect on the speaking subject and spell casting

If the new form is capable. . .

  • If the objective form is able to speak, the subject can communicate normally
    • This means that the objective form must be able to speak a language, not that it can simply vocalize some sounds
  • The subject can still cast spells.
    • Spells with verbal components (V) require the subject to speak
    • Spells with somatic components (S) require the subject to have limbs capable of penalty fee manipulation (gorilla fingers: yes, dog paws: no)
    • Spells with material components (M) require that the spell components are still accessible / not absorbed in the form

Effect on the physical qualities of the subject

The subject acquires. . .

The subject no. . .

  • Keeps his own mind
  • It obtains certain physical qualities of the objective form:
    • Movement (maximum speed 120 & # 39; flying, 60 & # 39; otherwise)
    • Natural armor
    • Natural weapons
    • Racial Skills Bonuses
    • Racial bonus feats
    • Rude physical qualities (i.e. shape and anatomy)
  • Additional limbs do not grant additional attacks
    • This refers to attacks from limbs, that is, attacks with weapons or attacks made with iterative attacks based on base attack bonuses
    • Natural weapons are explicitly granted, but keep in mind that such attacks are not with the limb but with a "claw" or "blow."
    • For example: a human becomes a whirlwind. The subject gains a bite and four natural claw attacks, as well as a tear attack (EX). The subject does no win 2 more dagger attacks or attacks based on the use of "limb": only "claw" attacks are obtained. If a whirlwind did not have a claw attack associated with its additional arms, then the subject would simply obtain the great physical quality of having 2 more arms, but could not use those arms to attack
    • Another good example is the behir, which has six arm-shaped limbs, but those limbs can only be used as part of their Rake (EX) action and not with any other form of attack.
  • Make no obtain physical qualities that have not been explicitly granted before, including (but not limited to) dark vision, low light vision, blind sense, blind vision, rapid healing, regeneration, aroma, etc.
  • The topic maintains their own non-EX physical qualities if they are not explicitly obtained from Polymorphic organism. Therefore, a subject dwarf, for example, would still have dark vision while transforming into a human being. A quality in the above list that is EX would still be lost, since EX qualities are normally lost explicitly.

Effect on the type of subject

The type of creature of the subject. . .

  • The type and subtype change to match the destination form
    • The clause "(if any)" in the subtype simply means that a subject whose normal form does not have a subtype will win one, and a subject whose normal form does have one will lose and / or change that subtype.
  • Templates are not allowed, no exceptions.
  • Incorporeal and gaseous creatures cannot be polymorphic
  • If the normal form of a creature has the form-changing subtype, it can return to its normal form as a standard action. This is an exception to the rule in which the normal subtype of a creature changes to match the new form.

Effect on the subject's appearance

You can designate freely. . .

  • All qualities related to appearance are at the discretion of the pitcher provided the values ​​are within the normal ranges for the target form
  • Give a +10 to the caster's costume check
    • This bonus probably also applies to the subject's costume test if, for example, a rogue is the subject of another character Polymorphic organism spell, but then disguises itself, but this is not clear

Effect on subject's equipment

When the change occurs. . .

Any part of the body . .

  • When a subject is transformed into the objective form, any equipment that the objective form is "capable of using or holding" is maintained
    • If an object is held in the hands and the new hands can hold it physically, it is maintained
      • Weapons can also make use of sizing property (Compendium of magic items, p.43) as a quick action to activate
    • If a worn object physically fits the new shape, it is preserved
  • In contrast, any equipment that is not "stored" is absorbed into the new form and is inactive while the subject is polymorphized.
  • When a subject resumes its original form:
    • the absorbed elements reappear in their original locations
    • any equipment retained / used that the original form can transport / retain is maintained
    • equipment that the original form cannot use / hold falls and lands at the feet of the subject
  • Polymorphic organism by itself no Resize or change the shape of any team, so that most mundane equipment that is not held in the hands, assuming the objective form has hands, will probably be absorbed if the objective form is larger than the current form of the subject. It will be the discretion of DM to what extent the subject may shrink and still be physically able to use equipment, but it does not have to fit well, just fit at all.
  • Any part of the body or equipment separated from the set returns to the original form.
  • A murdered creature returns to its original form and remains dead.

unit – Inheritance – access to the values ​​of the secondary class

If you want to share a variable, you must define it in the main or base class. If defined as protected or public, it is accessible to all children. It's like copying the variable in all of them.

Basically in OOP, low-level components should depend on high-level components without investment. therefore, defining a variable in the secondary class and accessing it in the primary class breaks the rules (I didn't try it but it should be impossible) basically creates instances of concrete or low-level classes.

If you think that way, your design is incorrect. I just read about (OOP, solid, Uncle Bob)

pathfinder 1e: does a psychic with the enhanced feat of Eldritch's inheritance for the psychic bloodline get any benefit from Undercasting Prodigy?

Does a psychic with the enhanced feat of Eldritch's inheritance for the psychic bloodline get any benefit from Undercasting Prodigy?

Undercasting Prodigy says:

From the ninth level, every time you win a new level of spells,
automatically replace any psychic spell that may be
undercast with the highest level version that you can launch on your list of
known spells. For example, on the ninth level, you would replace the mental impulse
I, id insinuation I, and ego whip I with mental thrust IV, id
innuendo III and whip of ego II, respectively, as known spells.

If a psychic knows the bloodline spells by choosing them as psychic and not the bloodline, can they replace lower level spells with higher level spells when possible?

c # – Refactoring inheritance classes

I had a test on code refactoring. And I don't know what it is and how to fix it …

Here is the original code.

public class BaseScene
{ 
    public BaseScene(object screenInfo) {}

    public virtual void Apply() {}
}

public class GameScene : BaseScene
{
    private double screenRatio;
    public GameScene(object screenInfo) : base(screenInfo)
    {
        screenRatio = (double)screenInfo;
    }
}

public class SceneScreen : MonoBehaviour
{
    public float screenRatio;

    private void Start()
    {
        BaseScene screen = new GameScene(screenRatio);
        screen.Apply();
    }
}

It wasn't about correcting mistakes or something. And there is no perfectly correct answer.

The code works fine as it is, but simply requested to refactor it somehow.

I would appreciate it if you could help me.

inheritance – Object-oriented analysis: is there a pattern or is my approach incorrect?

The alternatives depend on the overall structure of your analyzer (and lexer) and what the consequences and costs are if you guess wrong when dealing with a foo or a foo_special object.

As a first alternative, you can discard the inheritance of foo_special Y foo Instead, model your relationship further along the structure of your grammar: foo_special contains a foo. This means that you can create unambiguously a foo when you see "bar" in the token sequence, and a foo_special when you see "baz" after having created a foo.

If you want to keep the inheritance for some reason, you can also start by creating a foo and replacing the non-terminal object with a foo_special object when "baz" appears in the token sequence.

Those techniques would not work if your grammar were slightly different, for example

foo = "bar" ";"
foo_special = "bar" "baz" ";"

Then, he would resort to techniques such as an early search for N-tokens (with N being at least as large as the largest common prefix) or error recovery.

In the anticipated search for N-tokens, read N tokens from the lexer without consuming them to choose between foo Y foo_special.

If you use error recovery, choose an option and try to analyze it. If you encounter an analysis error, reverse the analysis tree to the decision point and try the next option again. If you ran out of options, you report an error to the user.

Would there be a problem with a large SharePoint list that breaks the inheritance of permissions at the list level?

Basically, have a SharePoint list in SharePoint Online that has more than 100,000 items. I want to change it so that the permissions granted to everyone (except administrators) can only be Add items.

I know there are performance issues when assigning unique permissions per item, but how about simply breaking the inheritance of permissions on the List Level?