|
[Edit]Just seen Giorgi's report on the next page - apologies![/Edit]
Example[^]
Quotation marks (only when inside pre tags) are displaying as & q u o t ; (spaces added to make html safe!).
The html is being set to
& a m p ; & q u o t ;
I've tried editing the source html to " and & q u o t but the same html is always produced.
It seems to work OK here though.
string str = "Hello World";
modified on Monday, September 15, 2008 7:17 PM
|
|
|
|
|
.
modified 27-Dec-17 19:37pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I do have to agree that a remove account button would be useful, but
Xargo wrote: This will avoid confusion as I might accidentally login on my old unused account, and start replying on topics I started with the other account.
You need to keep in mind that the email address is different for all CodeProject accounts (I believe), so you should be able to just use the correct email when logging in.
Regards,
Thomas Stockwell
Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.
Visit my Blog
|
|
|
|
|
Message Closed
modified 27-Dec-17 19:36pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect that it has more to do with referential integrity. If you delete an account, then shouldn't the messages go with it? What happens to threads then? Things are bad enough with people deleting messages, without making it worse.
|
|
|
|
|
So make the username/password columns of the table optional. Then null them to delete the account.
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots.
-- Robert Royall
|
|
|
|
|
Simplest thing is to not ever use the account again. I have an old one from 7 years ago that I lost the login info for, and it doesn't hurt anything.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
"Not only do you continue to babble nonsense, you can't even correctly remember the nonsense you babbled just minutes ago." - Rob Graham
|
|
|
|
|
I've written a total of 4 articles...from which two are for java...
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/IP/gzTx.aspx
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/java/Shove.aspx
These don't show up in "My Article" list...(even if i'm in the "Java" section)
my other two C++ Articles, do figure in the "My Articles" List...
Is this Normal? i sure hope not...
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Check now, should be good.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
Lead Technical Editor
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
I'm Sorry, But it's Not...
When i'm in the C++ Section, i can see atleast my 2 C++ articles...
if i go into the Java Section, and hit "my articles" i see zero articles...Just the search bar and an ad...nothing inbetween...
I could post a scrnshot if you want?
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Apologies. I see what it is now - you must select some attributes. Better now? I hope 
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
Lead Technical Editor
The Code Project
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, It is.
Thanks Sean!
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
This is a re-post of one I accidentally put in the wrong forum.  Please see the original post at :http://lamp.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=2605&msg=2720421
Thanks,
Time Traveler and Dimension Hopper, Bili Joe
____________________________________________
"It is never too late to give up our prejudices.." Henry D Thoreau
"The world is the totality of facts, not things." Ludwig Wittgenstein
"The fastest path to knowledge is through acknowledged mistakes." Anon.
"The object of the superior man is truth." Confucius
"I think, therefore I am." René Descartes
"Science may be described as the art of systematic oversimplification" Sir Karl Popper
|
|
|
|
|
The temporary workaround most of us use is to use one password for CP (that we will not use anywhere else). That way even if it's compromised other accounts remain safe. You could do that too.
Chris did mention that he might change this behavior in future.
|
|
|
|
|
I would suggest having passwords for every application unique and strong. We can take help of Password Manager like KeePass.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players.
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts... --William Shakespeare
|
|
|
|
|
Actually I think it is a good idea that this is done. The reason I like it is that even though you chose the password, The Code Project wants to ensure that it is the email user that will be using the account, which may not necessarily be you. Since you can put in any email address when you sign up for an account, this protocol ensures that the password will be known to the email user and not necessarily just by the person who has signed up.
Regardless, welcome aboard.
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
|
|
|
|
|
The password safe way to handle the email confirmation is to send an email saying "click here to activate the account. IF you didn't create it, do nothing, it'll automatically be deleted."
Today's lesson is brought to you by the word "niggardly". Remember kids, don't attribute to racism what can be explained by Scandinavian language roots.
-- Robert Royall
|
|
|
|
|
Brought over from the lounge...
How about allowing a user to simply mark an article as "useful", with no other option. That way, the article accumulates a number of "useful" votes, and mostly by the people that actually use the code.
Maybe we could refer to "useful" votes as "Bobs". So if an article has a high number of "Bobs", it must be a good article.
Converting existing articles to the new system would entail making all 3-5 votes count as "useful" votes, and 1-2 votes would simply be ignored.
I think this system would eliminate the negative voting (and the problems created as a result) completely.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
modified on Thursday, September 11, 2008 12:13 PM
|
|
|
|
|
It's an excellent idea, and one to be applauded. It also seems to be a glimpse of the softer, caring side of the outlaw programmer.
|
|
|
|
|
I totally agree.
The only thing I will miss about the current voting system is that when I'm looking for an article, I will usually look at the highest-rated article first, then the next, and so on. Over time, I suppose the "useful vote count" (divided by number of views ?) will supplant this.
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: (divided by number of views ?)
Right, how do you compare a new article with 10 Bobs for 10 views against an older article with 100 Bobs for 1000 views?
But "views" would be no good anyway; I can (and do) view articles multiple times, but can only provide one vote. Even an article I like would be diminished each time I refer back to it. Heck, I wouldn't want to recommend my own articles to anyone unless I was sure they'd vote positively for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Great Idea John.
In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. - Martin Luther King Jr.
Ernest Laurentin
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so let's use this[^] article as an example. Would the average Code Project member consider it useful? At first glance I don't - I suspect many others would feel the same way. I do consider it a good article though.
I think your idea has merit, but I think article rating and article usefullness are two different things. Views tend to reflect expected usefullness (based on the title) over time, so there is a bit of overlap.
Perhaps both ratings would be appropriate. A usefullness rating and an article quality rating.
Cheers,
Drew.
|
|
|
|
|
Here's my suggestion:
Some people vote 1 point because they genuinely feel that something sucks.
Some people vote 1 point because that's the measure of their own life.
We want to encourage the former and minimise the latter (give them back a "1 vote" to reflect their voting pattern that in turn reflects their life).
Currently, voting is distinguished from leaving a message. To vote and leave a message requires two separate submissions.
My suggestion is to explicitly combine voting and leaving a message.
Anyone can still just vote, or just leave a message, or combine both in one action.
Where they have to do both is if they are an early voter for a message or article, regardless of what their vote is (otherwise slime-bag 1 voters will just become 2 voters). Or where they vote against the trend.
Of course, their message can get voted down (or up), and this can be used to give a weighting to their vote. The message can also be marked as spam/abuse and the associated vote discarded entirely.
I just love Koalas - they go great with Bacon.
|
|
|
|
|
Lee Humphries wrote: Some people vote 1 point because they genuinely feel that something sucks
My contention is that the pre-screening that gets done before an article is posted theoretically should weed out all the articles that would, for one reason or another, garner a 1 (or even 2). At that point, the article is either useful to one or more other users, or it's not.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
