|
Are you adding an HR to your sig? If so, you don't need to since the forums will add one by default. In my sig, I have an HR but that's because I break my sig into two sections.
|
|
|
|
|
Unless the forums have started adding something recently. I haven't touched my sig, but it has an extra line now. I see the code is slightly changed (it isn't the same as what I've provided in my settings page) and there's no excuse to do it.
The sig should be *exactly* what I provide in the settings page. I presume something recently has broken it.
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
Your was wrapped in a div that had the ForumSig class. That class displays a top border, and sigs are wrapped in that class when they are added to posts. Your sig was double-lined.
I've fixed your sig.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Testing...
All OK. Thanks. 
“Follow your bliss.” – Joseph Campbell
|
|
|
|
|
'Code' tags for showing inline code blocks is not working.
>>> Set the <code>src</code> property of the <code>iFrame</code> object to the page containing the new data you want to show.
I tried to edit an answer[^] (with out checking who posted it!), but was not able to do it. It seems that the checked state of 'Ignore HTML tags' checkbox is always checked and is not getting saved properly.
"Never put off until run time what you can do at compile time."
- David Gries, in "Compiler Construction for Digital Computers", circa 1969.
|
|
|
|
|
I just tried to edit that answer and when I clicked "Update answer!", it just navigated back to the question/answer and no new version was added (i.e., the change was not applied). Strange.
|
|
|
|
|
Me too. At one point the Preview showed what appeared to be a correct rendition of the content, but when I pressed the Update button it reverted. I did notice that it is using a new version of the editor (maybe with Luc Pattyn's code validator?).
MVP 2010 - are they mad?
|
|
|
|
|
Hoi. Yes, my code has been adopted, and I don't know how they exactly use it, the goal was to call it only when actually pasting something; so simply typing text (even HTML tags) should work as before.
I tried to edit that message; I am able to, I see a CODE tag, it simply doesn't get interpreted. So my guess is the logic works as if the "ignore HTML tags" is checked (which it often is).
IMO the purpose AND the wording of the checkbox are wrong. The goal was to eliminate checkboxes as much as possible; IMO there should be:
1. a set of radio buttons, defaulting at auto (OK), just in case the logic fails to recognize what gets pasted;
2. a checkbox to deal [REWORDED] with HTML tags while something is being pasted and happens to be treated as text (because auto detect decided it was text, or the user forced it to be text) [/REWORDED]; so I would call it "escape HTML tags while pasting text"; that is quite different from the current wording, and I can't tell how it matches the current implementation.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. [The QA section does it automatically now, I hope we soon get it on regular forums as well]
modified on Wednesday, January 20, 2010 5:13 PM
|
|
|
|
|
The issue was a bug whereby you couldn't change the format of a post. This has been fixed.
The wording for pasting is very clear - as provided by the radio buttons
The "Ignore HTML in text (good for code snippets)" is needed for those who type in code manually. I'm open to suggestions for wording.
[default: true] "I will be using HTML tags in this message"
[default: false] "My text contains < and > - do not treat them as HTML tags"
[default: false] "Display HTML tags and entities as code - do not process them"
What's something clear and concise?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I'll have to come back on this one. I'm on the way out right now, and I need to walk through all the use cases first.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. [The QA section does it automatically now, I hope we soon get it on regular forums as well]
|
|
|
|
|
I like the second one best.
The first is poor because what happens with code with inequality statements is ambiguous.
The third isn't as good as the second due to the level of technical knowledge in the wording. At first glance I'd assume that only affected actual HTML things and that if i typed inequalities in my code that how they were displayed would be unaffected by it's setting.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Dang.. looking into this now!
|
|
|
|
|
Is Dang one of the new site admins?
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]
|
|
|
|
|
Actually.. it's one of the CP hamsters
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Thiru,
I just added a reply to Richard's message above. Please have a look.
Also, feel free to remove my edits to the answer message mentioned in the OP.
Cheers.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. [The QA section does it automatically now, I hope we soon get it on regular forums as well]
|
|
|
|
|
No worries. I did the same kind of testing 
|
|
|
|
|
It seems that quoting some others text is also getting language based styles. The whole text is coming in yellow background (like pre tag) and words like 'and' is highlighted.
"Never put off until run time what you can do at compile time."
- David Gries, in "Compiler Construction for Digital Computers", circa 1969.
|
|
|
|
|
Yikes. Thanks for the report.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry - bug fixed.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Instead of letting people vote on the responses, why not just allow the guy who asked the question mark an answer as "the" answer? Voting on quick answers is kinda pointless. They're either a correct answer, or they're not - there are no degrees of correctness. Once an answer is selected, further responses should be disallowed on the question.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"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." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Voting on quick answers is kinda pointless.
I'm not sure why things would be any different on QA, but then I don't understand much about QA overall.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: They're either a correct answer, or they're not - there are no degrees of correctness
IMO there are degrees of correctness, one can specify scope, add alternatives, and in general add relevant information.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: why not just allow the guy who asked the question mark an answer as "the" answer?
Because he is the one who did not know; maybe one answer did solve the problem in his particular circumstances, but isn't the real answer to the question in general. Wasn't QA meant as a kind of wiki, a knowledge base?
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]
I only read code that is properly formatted, adding PRE tags is the easiest way to obtain that. [The QA section does it automatically now, I hope we soon get it on regular forums as well]
|
|
|
|
|
Don't agree entirely
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Instead of letting people vote on the responses, why not just allow the guy who asked the question mark an answer as "the" answer? Voting on quick answers is kinda pointless.
I agree until there. (But most people asking questions don't return to vote a answer)
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: They're either a correct answer, or they're not - there are no degrees of correctness.
Here I would say that an answer can be partially correct meaning it solved a part of the problem but not entirely (or caused another error that the person asking the question only saw after voting).
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Once an answer is selected, further responses should be disallowed on the question.
Every answer has the possibility of having a better way, so I think adding another response should not be blocked since somebody might come along and say 'hey I had the same problem, fixed it a different way because the 'answer way' has the possibility of going wrong under certain circumstances'.
(Don't know if you understand what I mean)
|
|
|
|
|
Tom Deketelaere wrote: But most people asking questions don't return to vote a answer
Yeah, that's kind of annoying. Would be neat if Code Project prevented them from seeing the next answer until they voted on the previous answer. So, the first answer would be free. But they'd have to vote on the first one to see the second one and on the second one to see the third one and so on. That'd probably be abused, but maybe we can think of something similar that would be abused less.
|
|
|
|
|
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: They're either a correct answer, or they're not - there are no degrees of correctness.
I disagree. For example in this case a much better answer exists:
pwndNooblar:
Q: how do I sort an array of integers?
homeworkHater:
answer:
public void BogoSort(ref int numbers)
{
bool sorted = true;
for (i = 0; i < numbers.length-1; i++)
{
if (numbers[i] > numbers[i+1])
sorted = false;
}
Random r = new Random();
while (!sorted)
{
swap(numbers[r.Next(i.length)],numbers[r.Next(i.length)]);
sorted = true;
for (i = 0; i < numbers.length-1; i++)
{
if (numbers[i] > numbers[i+1])
sorted = false;
}
}
}
private void swap(ref int i, ref int j)
{
int temp = i;
i = j;
j = temp;
}
Answer has been accepted by pwndNooblar.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Mostly agree with what Tom said but here's my slight variation anyway:
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Instead of letting people vote on the responses, why not just allow the guy who asked the question mark an answer as "the" answer?
This is precisely what the 'Accept Answer' button is for. Only the OP is able to see and perform this task.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Voting on quick answers is kinda pointless. They're either a correct answer, or they're not - there are no degrees of correctness.
Like others have mentioned I too agree that there are degrees of correctness. Sometimes there are even two equally valid answers. Though this is highly dependent on the narrowness of the question.
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote: Once an answer is selected, further responses should be disallowed on the question.
See Tom's response.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
