|
Fixed.
Looks like that was a left-over from a formatting issue we had ages ago. I just touched the article and it fixed itself up.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
this[^] is showing the code snippets almost without format.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
All fixed.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Let say I have an article, current revision number is 100. I went to update it, and obviously the next revision number will be 101. After I submit, the article will go through the approval process. The reviewers/moderator will look at it and pick an option from "Approve or report this article:" section.
My question is, as a reviewer/moderator, how can I compare/tell what the changes/update between version 100 and 101? Since version 101 is not listed under Articles » Platforms, Frameworks & Libraries » Libraries » General » Revisions during the approval/review process.
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm. I don't believe you currently can from the system itself. I use an text compare site, personally.
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting point.
What you're after is a "compare with published" button, right?
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can't you do it with the versions revision?
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.
|
|
|
|
|
The current version revision do not provide the option to compare the published version and the one being submitted for review.
|
|
|
|
|
But the submitted for review (101) does offer the option to compare it with the current (100) if you go to "revisions (100)" (left side menu), then you see a list starting in 101 where 100 has the label current, if you don't see all versions you can go to "show minor changes" and it usually makes the list bigger.
Then you select the two you want to compare and click on "compare"
I use it sometimes to detect possible abusers making "updates" to gain more attention and keep their articles in the home page
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting. I can't figure out how you did that. Here is an example. Refer to the image below.
For this particular article, the Revision 21 is Available (status = Available) to the public. Then the author make some changes to it (Revision 22), and the article go through approval process.
During the approval/review process, I don't see version 22 in the Revisions table. My curiosity is to identify the difference between Revision 21 and 22 during the process.
After the approval/review process is finalize, now the version 22 is available under revisions table. But that after the fact.
publicly available vs pending[^]
|
|
|
|
|
mmm... not sure...
maybe my Protector condition helps on it?
I have make some screenshots but I am not at home and can't open some webs, I will post it in some days when I am back
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Any plan to implement the "compare with published" button anytime soon? 
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] could use a format correction.
@Sean-Ewington put your sunglasses before you open the blog  
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.
|
|
|
|
|
My eyes!
All fixed
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Coding Challenge: Smallest Circle Problem[^]
Tried to create O(n4), but inside <code> it displayed as is (encoded), <em> works fine however...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Hello Peter, I would recommend (or use myself) the Math library for such formulas or pseudo-representation of algorithms (or this Big O notation). That looks a lot cleaner as compared to Segoe based text. Also, in monospace there is no super or subscript, so I won't consider using it as it won't make any sense either.
Read the LaTex usage by Chris in his article, Article Formatting tips for CodeProject
The sh*t I complain about
It's like there ain't a cloud in the sky and it's raining out - Eminem
~! Firewall !~
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you...
I do use LaTeX in my other articles, but it is so small piece of code...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
I know my technical blog been downvoted by a high voting member's level. I respect that decision. But, can whoever downvoted it, please provide some guidance on what the problem was and how I can improve it? Please give me a chance to learn for my mistake.
10-Jan-17 2:54AM -40 Author Technical Blog Downvoted Technical Blog Convert DateTime To String Format In IQueryable Query
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean Ewington,
Is it possible to change name of my account to "tranthanhtu.vn".
It is my blog site.
Just ask for sure as I do not want to violate the rules of community and my account be disabled.
It is nice if you could give me your feedback about this.
Thanks,
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think it's a good idea. People will really scrutinize what you posted and how you posted it. If a blog entry came through that even seemed promotional of your blog and went live before you could change it, I have no doubt you would get reported and the fact that your name was your blog name would do you no favors.
While I have you, I would like to re-iterate that you should consider merging some of your series into larger articles. You have a lot potential and I'd encourage you to not post step by step, shorter articles like this:
Angular2 & WebApi (SPA) for Enterprise App - Part 8 - Build & Deploy Application
And focus on publishing fewer articles that are more complete and exhaustive, like this:
WPF: A Beginner's Guide - Part 4 of n
Thanks,
Sean Ewington
CodeProject
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Sean Ewington,
Thank for your feedback.
Ideally, My articles will talk around development and deploy enterprise application using angular + WebApi. Each isolated topic, I prefer was in article. So reader can easier to focus on one-by-one.
Yes, For future post, I will consider merging some small article to larger. Hope this make reader happier.
Thanks and regards,
TU Tran
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
