|
Thanks to you, too, David, for helping out the dozens, hundreds if not thousands of developers who come here for help. If it wasn't for you and developers like yourself patient enough to share they'd still be wandering around in the desert of confusion.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
I wrote a tips & tricks
- saved many times
- Submitted for approval
- got the DRAFT version
- got the "Pendig" version
Now When I look for the tips & tricks I wrote the only thing I obtain is only an early version
where my work is?
(Sorry, but this is very annoying and it is not the first time it happens!)
|
|
|
|
|
Is this the post? Are you able to access it?
Popup menu[^]
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
No!
That is a very early version.
What I think is codeproject has had a big failure and they lost everything
but they will never admit this
|
|
|
|
|
What about this one?
Popup menu[^]
If you go into Revisions and select Show Minor Revisions, and check the box that says "show auto-saved drafts" you should be able to take a peek around at all your drafts.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Perfect Sean
THANKS
you solved the problem. 
(do you know what happen?)
|
|
|
|
|
If you let me know your precise steps and setup (OS / browser) just prior to it happening, I can try and recreate it.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Keep a copy offline always. Never trust Online editor(Not just Codeproject's) which fails rarely due to internet connection issues.
|
|
|
|
|
It is not a matter of the editor.
In the DB there is the correct version, but when I extract that copy for editing I get a totally different copy of the "Tips&Tricks"
and this depend on codeprojct's "process" and how they manage issues (badly, very badly
(and this is very annoying)
|
|
|
|
|
Possibly cache issue.
Regarding online editor, if something happens on browser side(client), server can't so much. That's why offline copy is always a better option.
Anyway Admins're ready to fix any issues.
|
|
|
|
|
I just realized that now the forums only offer the overview of the threads and when you click on a message then you go to the thread itself.
I find the idea basically good, but I don't like how the opened thread is displayed (all messages expanded, white background, bold letters for the subjects as only separator between the messages)
Not sure if that is on purpose like that, but I would like to know... is this something "as it is" or can we deactivate it in our preferences?
It might save place, but I find the classic layout much better to navigate through the messages.
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 have not seen any changes. Have you checked your choices in the selector bar above the forum?
|
|
|
|
|
relaxed - Normal - 50 (as always)
Ok... that's weird... now is all fine (again?)
Where you normally see the "posted timestamp" there was a bold int indicating the number of answers that post had.
When opening the OP, you could see "this message has 3 answers" link
Clicking there you were redirected to other page where all messages of the thread were expanded with basic layout (it reminded me when you jump to a forum message from the results list of a search)
You had a "view all threads" link that brought you back to the forum overview...
Ok... now that you have told it... I have checked the other layouts... somehow I was in the "thread view", but I didn't change anything and it got back again to "normal"
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 just tried to add a comment (twice) to How do we add multiple entries together from a txt file in C++[^], but it seems they both got lost. Refreshed the question but nothing appeared, and no feedback that the servers are busy. Quite spooky really.
[edit]
The comments are now appearing ... it seems the servers are taking a long time to send the refresh back to the browser. Or maybe something entirely different is happening, and the little man who copies the comments and types them into the database just went out for a cup of coffee and a lamington?
[/edit]
modified 2-Jul-17 8:29am.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm seeing that too, and it's not the first time either.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, I've got a question just for my inquiry: a few weeks ago, I became one of participants of "Intel Corporation" group at CodeProject and was so much happy with it. This group previously had a very interesting description (i.e. biography) that was displayed nearby the group's logo in the "groups" tab of each participant. Soon, I've noticed that the text of the group's biography has suddenly disappeared from the "groups" tab in my profile as well as in profiles of many other members participating in this group. The text of the group's biography was replaced with the following message: "This member doesn't quite have enough reputation to be able to display their biography and homepage."
Particularly, my question is what reputation a participant is supposed to have so that the biography of Intel Corporation group is displayed under "groups" tab in his profile ?
And does it actually means that the biography contents for Intel Corporation group will be soon renewed ?
modified 1-Jul-17 9:16am.
|
|
|
|
|
The change was made to deal with the huge number of spammers who register an account, add the spam link as their home page and/or in the biography, and wait for the search engines to index it.
Prevent adding a home page link until on sufficient member level[^]
I don't know what the threshold is, but I assume it was set to something sensible.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
This article: Thread Wrapper for Modern C++[^]
has the text from this article: All in One Toolchain for Article Writing with Visual Studio Code[^]
Given that Sergey is a prolific writer, I think maybe CP messed up somehow.
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
Let's say, in article submission wizard, we have some comment text in HTML (entered or pasted in "source" mode):
<!-- some comment inside -->
When article is submitted, it is rendered exactly as it is shown above.
I understand that this is "not a bug, a feature", but rendering of comments is really hard to expect. It's pretty natural to have comments in original HTML, never rendered on the page. And I do understand that raw HTML code should be modified by the submission process: script and other unsafe elements needs to be eliminated, syntax coloring inside pre, etc., but… comments… After all, this is a "source" mode. Could we have an "as is" mode which does all such modifications but leaves safe and correct HTML syntax intact?
I'm reporting this issue not as a bug and not as a suggestion, just want to bring this issue to attention.
Thank you.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
We actually spent a fair bit of energy debating whether to strip or HTML encode comments.
Unfortunately, possibly because there was beer involved, I've forgotten the salient points.
Maybe we just strip out comments, eh?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, stripping them out would be much better.
Keeping and not rendering them would be even better, but it's not really important, because who would want to seriously rely on them? For one thing, it's hard to imagine a crazy writer who will store a lot of information in comments if they are preserved. From the other hand, if they are not preserved, who would regret about them?
As to rendering them… HTML comment rendering would be needed only for people writing on HTML, but what value can we expect from an author having problems rendering HTML comments in HTML without your help?
Thank you.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Recently, I published an article with my new article-writing toolchain: All in One Toolchain for Article Writing with Visual Studio Code.
After the files are uploaded and source code ZIP files are referenced, there is only one step needed to write the entire body of the article: paste HTML code pre-created offline. This is a very convenient and reliable thing, now made available to all CodeProject authors.
More, exactly, this is so with one exclusion: I have only one fix to do manually: TOC styles. I cannot automate it, because it is prevented by CodeProject style.
And this problem is not hard to fix. I described the nature of the problem and the solution here:
A suggestion for CodeProject TOC Style Fix.
Thank you for considering this suggestion.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
One important addition would be Visual-Studio-Code, which is majorly unrelated to Visual-Studio.
Code-Blocks would also be useful.
A while ago, the tags of some concrete Visual Studio versions were added, not always matching actually used Visual Studio version. Moreover, since Visual Studio 2015 (approximately), automatic detection of the actual version is not always possible, as Microsoft started to unify and reuse the solution formats/metadata and project tool versions. So, the detection should better be eliminated. The tags should be left to the article authors, I think.
[UPDATE: I just checked up: this is still a problem: VS2013 is automatically added, but Visual Studio 2015 is actually used]
Thank you.
—SASergey A Kryukov
|
|
|
|
|
Authors can add their own (new) tags if they have sufficient reputation.
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov wrote: Code-Blocks would also be useful.
As a tag?
Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov wrote: automatic detection of the actual version is not always possible
I'm removing this now.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
