|
|
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote: Is it a dream? or some one imperosonating you?
It's me. I'm starting to think my "going out" post should've been titled better. I never did intend to stop using CP altogether. I stopped dealing with the Lounge and SB and some of the people in it. Life's too short ya know and there's more I want to do with my time before I kill over.
Oh yeah, and I have no clue why this was voted down, but I threw in a 5 because well that's what I do. 
|
|
|
|
|
Cool
|
|
|
|
|
Although I do admit, at first I had withdrawals.  Funny how time can work wonders.
Anyway, I still intend to finish the game engine and post it on CP btw, and I have two more articles in the boiler right now. So, all-in-all things aren't too shabby.
|
|
|
|
|
Good to see you back on the boards mate.
the last thing I want to see is some pasty-faced geek with skin so pale that it's almost translucent trying to bump parts with a partner - John Simmons / outlaw programmer
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O`Hanlon wrote: Good to see you back on the boards mate.
Thanks Pete, although I still don't intend to ever be a part of the Lounge and SB communities. I'm taking my friends with me (email) and using CP for more of a educational place now rather than a social.
And low and behold, it's more productive this way.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: And low and behold, it's more productive this way.
Do you still lurk in the SB though? The subject of productivity's came up today.
--
Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
|
|
|
|
|
dan neely wrote: Do you still lurk in the SB though? The subject of productivity's came up today.
I did at first during the "withdrawal" stage. But, I've since realized the SB and Lounge is only really interesting for news and if you're bored. So, if I'm looking to veg out, I do what I should've been doing all along - go do something like watch a movie, hang out with the gf, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been seeing a lot of that lately... Kinda assumed there was some DB work going on behind the scenes (pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!).
|
|
|
|
|
Chris,
Why is it that when I modify an article, sometimes (perhaps, usually) the code snippets will lose their VS-like colorings? Eventually they get the colors back, but I was wondering if there is any way that you could make it always "re-colorize" the snippets when the article is changed.
I know it's a minor point, but I like my code snippets to have that VS look.
BTW - any plans for XAML snippet colorization? Please?
Thanks!
:josh:
My WPF Blog[ ^]
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act, but a habit. - Aristotle
|
|
|
|
|
The coloriser is broken on our IIS6 servers but works fine on the IIS5 servers. I've torn my hair out trying to find out why and have just had to move on with other stuff. It's all C++, too, which is doubly weird. web2.codeproject.com is working fine so I tend to use that one.
The old coloriser has some minor issues and doesn't handle ASP.NET well. We have a new one that's fully .NET that is awesome. I'm tossing up between running a background task to automatically recolorize all new articles after they are posted or trying to push forward the submission wizard part of the rewrite to get this part fixed.
The only problem with the background process is that if it kills the text (ie we screw up with the regular expressions we use) then there's no instant feedback to the author. I will put in place checks to ensure that at the worst it merely doesn't colorise instead of, say, ripping the guts out of your article.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the insight.
Chris Maunder wrote: I will put in place checks to ensure that at the worst it merely doesn't colorise instead of, say, ripping the guts out of your article.
Sounds good to me.
:josh:
My WPF Blog[ ^]
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act, but a habit. - Aristotle
|
|
|
|
|
Josh Smith wrote: Chris Maunder wrote:
I will put in place checks to ensure that at the worst it merely doesn't colorise instead of, say, ripping the guts out of your article.
Sounds good to me.
Interesting use of the word "good". I would have thought "good" would be reserved for a statement like, "I will put in place a coloriser that works properly all the time."
|
|
|
|
|
The coloriser hasn't been fully tested. It's beta. I can hold off installing it until I've had a chance to fully test it, or I can Get The Job Done and catch any mistakes it makes along the way.
So how about this: Why don't you write me one using your compiler. It should be able to take malformed HTML, find all the PRE and CODE tags, look up the lang attribute and colorise according to the language specified. It also needs to be fully extendable so we can add other languages, and it must be able to understand code such as you would find in ASP.NET pages where the language switches between HTML, Javascript, C#/VB.NET and back again.
Do that and I will give you a month's Showcase space for an article on your PEC.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I can hold off installing it until I've had a chance to fully test it, or I can Get The Job Done and catch any mistakes it makes along the way.
The "job" of a programmer includes testing and debugging. Yes, by all means, "hold off installing it until [you've] had a chance to fully test it." Or release it to a subset of the members who are willing to help you test it. But don't put it on the production site until you're sure it works. Releasing it, to the general public, when it has not been thoroughly tested is not "Getting the Job Done". And please don't say "this is a community site so different rules apply". Nonsense. This is commercial site - certainly from your perspective.
Chris Maunder wrote: and catch any mistakes it makes along the way
You're just making more work for yourself here. And you've got enough already. All that code you have to add to make sure articles don't get mangled is unnecessary in a test environment.
Chris Maunder wrote: So how about this: Why don't you write me one using your compiler. It should be able to take malformed HTML, find all the PRE and CODE tags, look up the lang attribute and colorise according to the language specified. It also needs to be fully extendable so we can add other languages, and it must be able to understand code such as you would find in ASP.NET pages where the language switches between HTML, Javascript, C#/VB.NET and back again.
I'm quite sure you're missing my point. When one is unable to do a "good" job at something, it's either because of incompetence or because the thing simply can't be done with the resources available - that is, one has "bitten off more than one can chew". Clearly, you're not incompetent, so I suggest (as I have many times before) that the whole thing has just gotten out of hand; it's all too, too complicated. There is no way you and your staff will be able to keep up with writing colorisers for every new syntax that the Microsoft dreams up. You may be fool enough to attempt such a thing; I'm not. Our Plain English coloriser works all the time, because (1) it's simple and (2) because we're not at the mercy of Microsoft regarding syntax - as you are. The best thing you can do is take a simpler approach, and try to move the burden of colorising elsewhere.
In this particular case, I suggest that you save yourself a great deal of time and energy by simply having contributors submit their articles as PDFs. That way, they can author using any tool of their choice, their work will appear exactly as they intended it, every article will be printable in a wysiwyg format, and all you will have to provide is posting and search capability which are within reach of your available resources. The burden of colorising would then be forever removed from your shoulders. Not to mention the fact that this approach would eliminate the temptation to include Intellitxt!
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: In this particular case, I suggest that you save yourself a great deal of time and energy by simply having contributors submit their articles as PDFs.
I love PDFs just as much as the next guy - for eBooks! If we start moving everything to PDFs rather than hypertext for the Web we may as well go the whole nine yards and dump HTTP in favor of Gopher with its obviously superior format.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: I love PDFs just as much as the next guy - for eBooks! If we start moving everything to PDFs rather than hypertext for the Web we may as well go the whole nine yards and dump HTTP in favor of Gopher with its obviously superior format.
Perhaps something like that is called for.
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: Perhaps something like that is called for.
We already have it in most major cities around the world. It's called the library. Because moving to that would be no different except one is on paper and the other has a splash screen by Adobe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
dan neely wrote: For people with visual impairment or really small screens it's even worse.
You can enlarge the view in most readers.
dan neely wrote: PDF's rigid control over formating makes it the jackbooted thug of document formats.
Well, to each his own. The only thing I don't particularly care for with PDFs is Adobe's reader. I think the format is a-ok.
Anyway, I do like eBooks which is a lot like a manual. I wouldn't want to have them replace the Web at all though.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeremy Falcon wrote: dan neely wrote:
For people with visual impairment or really small screens it's even worse.
You can enlarge the view in most readers.
and have to use horizontal scrolling to read every single line. 
--
Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.
|
|
|
|
|
You've gone from mildy amusing and arrogant... to absolutely rude and arrogant.
You have done nothing but complain about this site for the last week or two. What, to everyone else is a minor bugbear or annoyance, to you is some major showstopper that we "just shouldnt tolerate from a premier website!!!". Balls. We all manage to use this site every day and it works just fine 99.9% of the time.
Let me spell this out as your intelligence level seems to have droped sub-Dan and possibly sub-Chuckles.
You. Are. The. Only. One. Complaining. Sensible. Readers. Make. Suggestions. To. Improve. The. Site. They. Never. Complain. That. The. Site. Is. Unusable.
Gerry, you cuss this site all day and insult its readership. Just go away. Begone. Don't come back this time. Life will be sweeet for you (no more CP bugs to upset you) and for all of us (no more osmosi-clan to upset us).
|
|
|
|
|
J4amieC wrote: The. Site. Is. Unusable.
But. Not. Working. Properly.
|
|
|
|
|
The Grand Negus wrote: Interesting use of the word "good". I would have thought "good" would be reserved for a statement like, "I will put in place a coloriser that works properly all the time."
Do you pay a membership fee to CodeProject? No.
Are they contractually obligated to provide code snippet colorization? No.
Should beggars be choosers? No.
:josh:
My WPF Blog[ ^]
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence then, is not an act, but a habit. - Aristotle
|
|
|
|
|
Josh Smith wrote: Do you pay a membership fee to CodeProject? No.
Are they contractually obligated to provide code snippet colorization? No.
Should beggars be choosers? No.
Should programs work? Not work for me, but work simply as a matter of principle?
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
