★Bluetooth USB Device Class Devices for Windows 7 [Changelog]
★Bluetooth USB Device Class Devices for Windows 8.1 [Changelog]
★BlueZ 5.28.0 on Windows 7
★Bluetooth USB Device Class Devices for Windows 10 [Changelog]
★Bluetooth USB Device Class Devices for Windows 8.1 [Changelog]
★BlueZ 5.28.0 on Windows 8
★Bluetooth USB Device Class Devices for Windows 10 [Changelog]
★BlueZ 5.28.0 on Windows 8.1
★Bt_Bluetooth dongle software
★Bluetooth USB Device Class Devices for Windows 8.1 [Changelog]
★Bluetooth USB Device Class Devices for Windows 7 [Changelog]
★Bluetooth USB Device Class Devices for Windows 10 [Changelog]
A:
Thank you so much for your help.
I solved it by changing the product name.
Usually, for 64-bit Windows, the product name is "Com"
Instead, I chose "Com2" for 64-bit Windows, and "FV" for 32-bit Windows.
Q:
Why do scala collections have Java collections in their API?
I know that Scala was designed from the ground up to be like Java, so that means the implementation is very similar.
However, Scala collections do not extend java.util.Collection, they implement the Collection interface.
Is there any reason why the scala collections were designed this way? Or was it just a matter of convenience?
A:
In Scala there is no "the" or "the Java collections" concept - the collection API is just that: the API.
There is no reason it has to be "similar" to Java's. Different collections are backed by different implementations in different places, e.g. for Array, there is a Java array class, a scala.collection.mutable.Array and a scala.collection.immutable.Array.
So, scala collections don't (mostly) use Java's, and the java.util.Collection concept has no meaning in the scala collections API.
A:
As an API designer for a language I'd say they do it for several reasons.
The collections API should be the least change of any API in the Scala API.
As the runtime data 01e38acffe
Related links:
Comments