|
In a different wording: The functionality is not available.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
I suppose so, yes;
Which then prompts me to wonder why the "Allow private email replies to this message" checkbox remains on the Reply To Message screen;
 I've just realized my brain did something funny. It somehow slipped into code-mode and ended the sentences with a semi-colon instead of a period.
|
|
|
|
|
enhzflep wrote: Which then prompts me to wonder why the "Allow private email replies to this message" checkbox remains on the Reply To Message screen;
Legacy?
Maybe to be restored in a future? I think it is easier to just make
IF (Status == Protector ) email = visible;
than redo the whole sit to delete the link and its implications / relationships with the personal profile and so on and so on.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
enhzflep wrote: I've either never known or simply forgotten how to obtain it. (I suspect it's awarded manually)
Yeah... it is given by CP staff manually.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
If given by CP staff manually
Would you like to elaborate on the criteria for being granted?
Provided it is not a long diatribe.
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Official definition: These dedicated members help ensure that a million members sending hundreds of articles each week do the right thing. They can moderate and remove inappropriate articles, edit eye-straining formatting and move under-performing (or recovering) articles to and from Purgatory. If you see an article that needs attention then let these guys know. Spot them in the forums by their protectors icon protector.
My additions: Help the site against spammers, clean up messes, be moderated and intercede in discussion to keep things civilized...
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks I asked because a member here said PM me I can help you with that
I could not see how to PM someone
and looking at the members account no Email button like I see on some other members
My privileges has a check by "can email"
So If I wanted one time privileged to email a member ask CP headquarters ?
but this only works if the other member had the Email Button
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure. To ask for help you can use the Bugs and Suggestions[^] forum. Over there the Staff read often the messages
@sean-ewington the check in the privileges list, that's soemthing that should maybe be changed to avoid missunderstandings linke this?
That's only visual, should be doable without affecting other stuff, shouldn't it?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
I've never done it before, but on a forum thread, if the member is set up to allow private emails, you can click the Email button on their message, and it creates a form that looks like a normal forum thread response, but says, "this won't be posted on the site."
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Just curious, or am I expecting too much ?
OK, I declare / define C function to return int...
Then I forget to add
return ...
in code.
Compiles / links AND crashes with no error message...
|
|
|
|
|
Wrong place to ask. When you find the correct place, include the actual code and other details.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Without an explicit return statement, functions default to returning an int. What compile level are you using? I always use level 4.
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
|
|
|
|
|
Me too and that was my first thought. How did that even compile?
"They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers! Can I get an amen?"
|
|
|
|
|
Might not wanna help him. This is the third time he's posted a programming question in the lounge. And from what I've seen the forums, he's not doing much better there either.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
That's what I was going to private email someone about yesterday.
I’ve given up trying to be calm. However, I am open to feeling slightly less agitated.
I’m begging you for the benefit of everyone, don’t be STUPID.
|
|
|
|
|
I have never look for "compile level", but I 'll try to find it...
Do you mean any function will return int or just when it is declared as returning
int specifically ?
I will have to go see if I actually used the return value...
But since few souls mention this not to post programming questions
I hesitate to post the actual code...
int TEST ( int test )
{
}
for those who needed the code
please note
THERE IS NO "return test;"
WHOOPS
I did not format it properly...
(time to get banned ...)
|
|
|
|
|
Even with all warnings disabled, the compiler should throw an error. ( visual studio and C++)
int Patate()
{
}
goto one of the programming forum and post minimal code that reproduce the problem.
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
Dude, this is like the third time. Clearly it's intentional now. You are expecting too much since this is the lounge.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: Clearly it's intentional now.
Was it even a doubt before? Alone how the messages are phrased...
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Seems like something like this question was discussed not that long ago.
Salvatore Terress wrote: define C function to return int...
So C and not C++.
Per the following at least as far as the C11 spec this is allowed. I did not verify the spec myself.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10079089/implicit-int-return-value-of-c-function[^]
As several replies suggest the behavior is undefined however if the caller attempts to use the value. That of course would include crashing.
But there could be other reasons for it crashing.
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,040 3/6
⬜⬜⬜🟨🟨
🟨⬜🟨🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,040 4/6
⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨
🟨🟨⬜🟨⬜
🟨⬜🟨🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 1,040 4/6
⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜
🟨🟨⬜🟨🟨
⬜🟨🟨🟩🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨
⬜⬜🟨⬜⬜
⬜🟨🟨🟨🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
