This is very much reminiscent of "rights amplification" and "synergy" in the capability security model, where historically one of the physical manifestations of this is that of the can + can opener which combine to reveal the contents of the can.
Personally I'm extremely curious to hear about legal examples of the same, if you can provide tangible ones!
These days I would prefer it say that the documentation for communication protocols and for any computer control interface or network functionality must supplied and destination any addresses configurable by the user.
build.rs is a useful escape hatch for if you need to do something more complicated, but the nice thing about cargo is that for the most part the defaults work. Generally build.rs only comes in if you have to deal with C, C++ or some other external ecosystem. A pure rust crate basically never needs to touch it, across multiple platforms and build configurations.
I notice that cp437 has enspace, so I wonder if enspace combined with the "small house", is used to indicate the insertion point, or position between two characters when producing error messages.
FWIW, I like that you include water content, libraries like google's health connect seem to have completely separate data structures for nutrition and hydration.
I think the article is referencing two different cases, and the ones invalidated don't seem related to oximetry, I'm not sure what happened with the oximetry one though.
reply