Bugs and Suggestions

Re: Cannot download most article source attachments in Firefox 3.x (recieve error.aspx=NoFileName)

22-Dec-09 6:41

One man's random is another man's bug.

It was our fault.

cheers,
Chris Maunder

The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP

vextant22-Dec-09 6:46

vextant

22-Dec-09 6:46

Yes sir, I hear you. Glad I reported it then, hope it didn't cause you too much trouble.

Cheers!

Re: Cannot download most article source attachments in Firefox 3.x (recieve error.aspx=NoFileName)

Chris Maunder22-Dec-09 6:48

Re: Cannot download most article source attachments in Firefox 3.x (recieve error.aspx=NoFileName)

22-Dec-09 6:48

vextant wrote:
hope it didn't cause you too much trouble

Mate - it's you for whom I worry about the bug causing trouble.

cheers,
Chris Maunder

The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP

Robert Ibsen Voith21-Dec-09 21:21

Robert Ibsen Voith

21-Dec-09 21:21

I see the same in IE 8. My FireFox 3.5.5 (and Opera 10.1 by the way) works fine though

Proud Programmer!

Blatant advertising

Pete O'Hanlon21-Dec-09 1:39

Pete O'Hanlon

21-Dec-09 1:39

You may want to nuke this[^] message/account.

"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith

As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.

My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx

Re: Blatant advertising

Chris Maunder21-Dec-09 4:48

Wrong article version reported

21-Dec-09 4:48

Thanks. Nuked.

cheers,
Chris Maunder

The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP

.dan.g.20-Dec-09 22:23

.dan.g.

20-Dec-09 22:23

Hi CP

When ToDoList notifications are sent they report themselves as 'ToDoList 5.1.1' rather than the actual title version which is '6.0.7'.

ToDoList 6.0.7 Feature Release - A simple but effective way to keep on top of your tasks[^]

Thanks

.dan.g.

AbstractSpoon Software
abstractspoon2_at_optusnet_dot_com_dot_au

Re: Wrong article version reported

Chris Maunder23-Dec-09 3:22

Re: Wrong article version reported

23-Dec-09 3:22

This is, unfortunately, a known bug. It's in the queue to be fixed.

cheers,
Chris Maunder

The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP

.dan.g.23-Dec-09 20:12

.dan.g.

23-Dec-09 20:12

Cool thanks.

.dan.g.

AbstractSpoon Software
abstractspoon2_at_optusnet_dot_com_dot_au

Post deletion request

Leslie Sanford20-Dec-09 5:42

Leslie Sanford

20-Dec-09 5:42

ANOTHER ARTICLE POSTED BY A DMBSHIT‏
[^]

This is actually so over the top as to be funny, but I wouldn't mind it being deleted from my message board. I know there's a mechanism in place for use to vote for its deletion, but that could take awhile.

Richard MacCutchan20-Dec-09 9:38

Richard MacCutchan

20-Dec-09 9:38

Leslie Sanford wrote:
This is actually so over the top as to be funny

I don't agree, I cannot find any humour in this post. It looks like this person has created this login id today just to post this inane comment. Do we really want this sort of thing to be encouraged?

Leslie Sanford20-Dec-09 10:17

Leslie Sanford

20-Dec-09 10:17

Richard MacCutchan wrote:
I don't agree, I cannot find any humour in this post.

I meant funny as in whatever sting the poster intended to inflict (I'm the one the insult was directed towards) was dimished by how over the top his post is. He's trying so hard to be insulting to the point of it being silly.

Richard MacCutchan wrote:

Do we really want this sort of thing to be encouraged?

Uh, no. That's why I'm requesting that the post be deleted. And it wouldn't hurt to delete the acount as well, in my opinion.

I'm a little surprised I'm having to explain this.

Richard MacCutchan20-Dec-09 10:26

Richard MacCutchan

20-Dec-09 10:26

Leslie Sanford wrote:
I'm a little surprised I'm having to explain this.

Well you wrote

Leslie Sanford wrote:
This is actually so over the top as to be funny

in your original post. I don't know what type of English you use but in English English 'funny' means humorous, provoking laughter, so I thought you meant that it made you laugh; hence my comments.

Leslie Sanford20-Dec-09 10:39

Leslie Sanford

20-Dec-09 10:39

Richard MacCutchan wrote:
I don't know what type of English you use but in English English 'funny' means humorous, provoking laughter, so I thought you meant that it made you laugh;

The guy was trying so hard to insult me to the point where I couldn't help buy laugh at it. Not in a laugh out loud sort of way or the way you'd laugh at a good joke, but rather laughing at someone trying to insult you who comes across as being silly instead. That's what I meant by his post being so over the top to the point of being "funny."

But I wouldn't want to encourage this type of behavior, not at all. So deleting his post from my article's message board will be fine with me. Smile | :)

Pete O'Hanlon20-Dec-09 11:27

Pete O'Hanlon

20-Dec-09 11:27

Enough people voted to remove it that it's gone, and all that's left is his rather appropriate name and a Message Automatically Removed. It's all rather fitting really.

"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith

As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.

My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Onyx

This site

camainc17-Dec-09 8:00

camainc

17-Dec-09 8:00

I am viewing the web on a large monitor. It is frustrating trying to read articles on this site in a modern browser - the text flows all the way across the page, regardless of how wide the monitor is!

The only way to actually read an article is to open the site/page in a separate browser instance, and then manually resize the browser down to a width that is comfortable for reading - something less than 230 characters per line or thirty or forty words per line...

"The ideal line length for text layout is based on the physiology of the human eye... At normal reading distance the arc of the visual field is only a few inches - about the width of a well-designed column of text, or about 12 words per line. Research shows that reading slows and retention rates fall as line length begins to exceed the ideal width, because the reader then needs to use the muscles of the eye and neck to track from the end of one line to the beginning of the next line. If the eye must traverse great distances on the page, the reader is easily lost and must hunt for the beginning of the next line. Quantitative studies show that moderate line lengths significantly increase the legibility of text.

Web Style Guide - Basic Design Principles for Creating Website
Patrick J. Lynch and Sarah Horton
2nd edition, page 97."

Please change the site layout to make it easier to read the articles without having to manually resize the browser window.

Nish Nishant17-Dec-09 9:07

Nish Nishant

17-Dec-09 9:07

Life has come full circle Smile | :)

Just 6-7 years ago, people were complaining that the articles were scrolling horizontally. And now you have the exact opposite problem!

Regards,
Nish

Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link

camainc17-Dec-09 9:47

camainc

17-Dec-09 9:47

Life is like that, isn't it?

Maybe it's time to update the site to reflect the fact that most users have monitors capable of display more than 1024x768.

Big Grin | :-D

Nish Nishant17-Dec-09 9:56

Nish Nishant

17-Dec-09 9:56

camainc wrote:
Maybe it's time to update the site to reflect the fact that most users have monitors capable of display more than 1024x768.

Out of curiosity, what size monitor do you have, and at what resolution?

I am on a 24" monitor at 1920x1200 and I am not majorly inconvenienced when I read articles.

Regards,
Nish

Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link

camainc17-Dec-09 10:21

camainc

17-Dec-09 10:21

I don't think you are representative of the majority. Perhaps you have trained yourself to read very wide columns of text, especially if you are on this site a lot.

There is a lot of great information on the web regarding usability. I posted a quote about long text columns earlier. Here is another link:

http://informationarchitects.jp/100E2R

What you guys do on your site is up to you, of course, but I would imagine there are a lot of people who would come here more often (myself included) if your site was easier on the eyes.

Oh, and I am looking at this site right now on a 20" LCD at 1600 x 1200.

Nish Nishant17-Dec-09 10:32

Nish Nishant

17-Dec-09 10:32

camainc wrote:
I don't think you are representative of the majority. Perhaps you have trained yourself to read very wide columns of text, especially if you are on this site a lot.

That's possible - as I said in my previous post, I was asking out of curiosity.

camainc wrote:
What you guys do on your site is up to you, of course, but I would imagine there are a lot of people who would come here more often (myself included) if your site was easier on the eyes.

I don't work for CP (I used to), so my reply to you was my personal opinion. That said, Chris and his team usually go to great lengths to make the site more usable, and I am sure they'll respect your feedback and suggestions.

Regards,
Nish

Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link

Luc Pattyn17-Dec-09 10:57

Luc Pattyn

17-Dec-09 10:57

Maybe you are cheating and not using your browser with a maximized window? Poke tongue | ;-P

Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [Why QA sucks] [My Articles]

I only read code that is properly indented, and rendered in a non-proportional font; hint: use PRE tags in forum messages

Dan Neely18-Dec-09 2:34

Dan Neely

18-Dec-09 2:34

Nor am I on a 22" screen. What will set me off with site design is having 30-50% of my screen space wasted because the designer hardcoded an 800/1024px wide layout.

3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18