|
Try configuring the Date Filter as "Last Week".
Maxwell Chen
|
|
|
|
|
We all know VB is slow...
(Sorry - it was a joke just sitting there, helpless, ready for the taking...)
Sounds like it's just a high load situation but I'll check the caching and make sure it's set OK
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
In my latest article I use the word BYTE enclosed in CODE tags. When viewed on CP, the word BYTE had this sick blue-green color, even though it was enclosed in CODE tags (which I thought would always produce dark red color).
To get around this I divided BYTE into two pieces, with no space, each piece enclosed in CODE tags.
|
|
|
|
|
BYTE is defined as a known word (not a keyword, but as a VIW, very important word) so gets colourised the way the IDE colorises it. Anything in a CODE or PRE tag gets colourised unless you use "lang=text"
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Anything in a CODE or PRE tag gets colourised unless you use "lang=text"
So if I use (in angle brackets instead of quotes) "CODE lang=text" it will appear as a shade of red?
|
|
|
|
|
Yes
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
 I can remember when CODE always generated the same familiar red font. I'm guessing that this "enhancement" is a recent thing. Now I have to look through all my articles to see what kind of poofy colors are being displayed.
I don't mind innovation, honest. But when you make global changes like this, can't you make the default behavior to be "like the way things were"?
|
|
|
|
|
'poofy colors'? 
I'm using the same colours as are in the Visual Studio IDE. The colourisation of the <code> blocks has always been there but was always broken. In the older articles you would see some that had it, some that didn't.
What would you prefer:
1. I change the colour from poofy green to something else. Standard keyword blue? This is how it (sometimes, unreliably) was in the old system
or
2. For code blocks that have no 'lang' attribute, the block will not get colourised.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry about the poofy, I was trying to be KSF.
Would it be possible to have some top-level tag in article that says, Render all CODE blocks in red?
Or maybe in Wizard, have an option like that? Then a non-poofy filter would kick in, and the article would be colorized only with red CODE blocks.
I hate to think of how many times I've used CODE. Ideally, I would like to switch all my articles to use non-poofy red CODE blocks. Would it be possible to apply that to all my articles? Or do I have to manually change each one?
New articles are not a problem, I will do whatever it takes. I just hope Chuck Norris doesn't see any of my older articles. 
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: I can remember when CODE always generated the same familiar red font.
Hey Hans,
That's not correct. Even in the old days, if you put a keyword in CODE tags, say something like int or char, it would come in blue (and not in brownish red). Even back then you had to use lang="text" to ensure that no colorization took place.
Yeah but this VIW innovation seems to be new. I noticed a few ones recently as well. Though it looks alright - like Visual Studio with Whole Tomato installed
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: I can remember when CODE always generated the same familiar red font.
Hey Hans,
That's not correct. Even in the old days, if you put a keyword in CODE tags, say something like int or char, it would come in blue (and not in brownish red). Even back then you had to use lang="text" to ensure that no colorization took place.
Yeah but this VIW innovation seems to be new. I noticed a few ones recently as well. Though it looks alright - like Visual Studio with Whole Tomato installed
|
|
|
|
|
Well, maybe it's just deja vu again - like I could swear that I've seen this message before.
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: Well, maybe it's just deja vu again - like I could swear that I've seen this message before.
Damn!
|
|
|
|
|
to include "VC9.0" under "Languages".
|
|
|
|
|
This should be coming through soon
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
There are some articles here on CP that original authors no longer support, for whatever reason. My suggestion: if OA no longer wants to support article, he can email admin@CP, and article will be flagged with "no author attached" visual flag. Any CP member can then request admin@CP to transfer article ownership to him. Of course, this request will be reviewed by admin@CP.
|
|
|
|
|
Hans Dietrich wrote: Any CP member can then request admin@CP to transfer article ownership to him.
 Are you serious? How can someone take ownership without permission of owner? Don't we call that stealing?
Mostly, when you see programmers, they aren't doing anything. One of the attractive things about programmers is that you cannot tell whether or not they are working simply by looking at them. Very often they're sitting there seemingly drinking coffee and gossiping, or just staring into space. What the programmer is trying to do is get a handle on all the individual and unrelated ideas that are scampering around in his head. (Charles M Strauss)
|
|
|
|
|
Mladen Jankovic wrote: Are you serious? How can someone take ownership without permission of owner? Don't we call that stealing?
As I said in my post, "if OA no longer wants to support article, he can email admin@CP". In other words, the OA must initiate this, so no, it's not stealing, it's the OA handing over his article to someone else. Please read my post again. 
|
|
|
|
|
I think the "owner wannabe" can still answer queries at the article discussion board, without being the actual author of the article, because the article is the hard work of the actual author. Just my thought.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero
.·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·.
Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
You're right, and you can see a lot of examples of that happening. But in terms of collecting together bug fixes, or extending the article's code, there is really no substitute for being able to upload a new zip file to the article's page, especially if you had someone who was enthusiastic about supporting the code.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with you. In that case, probably the CP admin could into that matter and make the enthusiastic person as a co-author, without transferring the actual ownership of the published material.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero
.·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·.
Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
You know, until you mentioned it, I had forgotten about the new "co-author" feature. Maybe that would work. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
|
Why not leave the original article in place, but have a process whereby an enthusiast can take over a 'new edition' which acknowledges the original author (and links to the original). The enthusiast could request this and if not vetoed by the original author then it would proceed - the original article would have a clear link at the top to the newer maintained version that would collect votes and feedback separately.
Peter
"Until the invention of the computer, the machine gun was the device that enabled humans to make the most mistakes in the smallest amount of time."
|
|
|
|
|
i can't bookmark after submitting an article, please help me.
_____________________________
Don't download it, make it.
Visual Basic /C#
modified on Wednesday, March 12, 2008 9:41 PM
modified 13-Feb-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Fixing it now
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
