An obvious response to this tension is to dismiss the doctrine of transferred intent as the archaic relic of a bygone legal age. That response would have been consistent with Cardozo’s suggestion that allowing the victim of a harmful action to sue for the breach of a duty owed to another would be “to ignore the fundamental difference between tort and crime.”129 Transferred intent doctrine has its roots in the early writ of trespass, which sat somewhat indeterminately at the border of crime and tort (as we understand those legal categories today).130 The doctrine continues to play an important role in the criminal law, which few are prepared to abandon. But it is possible to maintain that the doctrine’s persistence in tort law is an archaism that ought to be abandoned.
and we decline to implement it. Our reasons are documented on this page
，更多细节参见传奇私服官网
过去两周，这个项目在深圳开发者圈迅速传播。
// 易错点5：忘记push当前索引 → 后续价格无法找到正确的上一个更大值，结果全错