|
I have seen a lot of new users with Aug2021 in the name. And going back to Juli there is a bunch with Jul2021 too (way more with only 2021 though)
Is it something that CP is adding when a name already exists?
Or are the spammers probably reusing names adding the suffix to make "unique IDs"?
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
modified 15-Aug-21 7:34am.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it seems to be a new phenomenon, but some of them do appear to be genuine, and post proper questions. Maybe this is the fashion at some social media site.
|
|
|
|
|
When someone registers using an existing name we generate a set of available names they can use instead. The MonthYear pattern is one such suggestion.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
There would appear to be an inordinate number of duplicate names being selected recently.
|
|
|
|
|
Can you please check my settings, and let me know why I am not getting any newsletters?
|
|
|
|
|
I've just sent you a copy of Friday's newsletter.
Please tell if you receive it. I may take a few minutes.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
I'm getting them again, thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
Both in the selection preview (see screenshot) and as applied on the RHS, the emoji aren't what we're used to.
My "pointing hand" was on the one above the LHS of the black box.
Cheers,
Peter
[edit] They're back... Cache issue, maybe? [/edit]
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
modified 13-Aug-21 3:09am.
|
|
|
|
|
What browser were you using?
Those emoji are purely Unicode characters. It's up to the browser as to what it displays given the Unicode number thrown at it.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
FF 91.0 on Ubuntu 20.04LTS.
When I first saw it, I hit crtl-F5 for a total refresh. Still funny. Took a screenshot and posted.
An hour or so later, I took another look and it was all good again, so I updated my post.
Weird...
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
I’ve had Unicode screw up in a similar manner in newer versions of FF on Windows, so it seems to be a FF bug.
What do you get when you cross a joke with a rhetorical question?
The metaphorical solid rear-end expulsions have impacted the metaphorical motorized bladed rotating air movement mechanism.
Do questions with multiple question marks annoy you???
|
|
|
|
|
Example
Not a new bug, this has been happening in FF for a long time and I know I reported it before; but I'm feeling extra grumpy/lazy this morning.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
Dan Neely wrote: I'm feeling extra grumpy/lazy this morning.
And we respect that. Me too, actually.
The issue here is, appropriately, one of laziness. To quote the text we simply ask the browser: "what's been selected". We try and constrain the text to only that in the summary window, but that's not an exact (or even "rough") science. Things leak.
I'll have Matthew add a task to tighten this up a little.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
sigh
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
Creepy, because I was literally just reviewing that bug at the time you posted this (Bug Categorisation Tuesday here in Toronto). There's actually a related bug to this one, and what I was thinking was simply just stripping all HTML from pastes as a band-aid option.
However, it turns out there's a maybe-disappear-in-the-future option that solves this in one fell swoop. I'll add this and next deploy things should be saner.
Yay "standards" and "common sense". This only works in Firefox as far as I can tell.
Back to the drawing board.
cheers
Chris Maunder
modified 22-Sep-21 9:34am.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: However, it turns out there's a maybe-disappear-in-the-future option that solves this in one fell swoop. I'll add this and next deploy things should be saner.
Would be nice if that goes from draft to standard; having to play whackamole with stuff we don't want to be selectable on a drag/drop heavy page earlier this year was not fun. 
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
So quick testing shows the situation is about as bad as it gets: the one feature of this I see as really handy - the user-select:contain option - is only supported in IE. Where it's actually "element" instead of 'contain', but has been updated in the spec to rename it to "contain", for a feature supported by one browser which is now actively being purged from existence.
Web development is so rewarding somedays.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Web development is so rewarding somedays.
It often makes me long for the days when the most advanced communications medium involved poking mudpies with sticks and then letting them dry out.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
|
|
|
|
|
The beauty being
- We can still read those mud pies
- Bandwidth was never a problem
- There were never any breaking mudbrick standard changes. Just breaking mudbricks.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
In the article How to Render Bitmap or to Print a Visual in WPF[^], the Download sample - 28.93 KB[^] link to download all of the associated code, fails with:
Is this because the article is more than a decade old?
However, the "Browse Code" link does show a "BitmapSample.zip" and the files in a hierarchical structure.
"Fairy tales do not tell children the dragons exist. Children already know that dragons exist. Fairy tales tell children the dragons can be killed."
- G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
I get a slightly different error message:
Quote: /Articles/103184/KB/Blogs/103184/BitmapSample.zip appears to be missing on our servers. D'oh.
And the "browse code" link shows:
Quote: No downloads associated with this content
The download link in the original blog post appears to be broken as well, so it's possible it may never have worked.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks very much for the report. I've emailed the author to see if they keep very old backups so we can replace the file.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
No survey this week ?
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
Monday was a holiday in Toronto, so I suspect you'll see it on Tuesday.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank for the information.
Patrice
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler.” Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
