|
You guys recently (like 3 weeks ago) made a change to the Latest Article page where both visited and unvisited links show up in blue. It used to be that visited links showed up in purple. Having them both the same color makes it really difficult to see what articles you've already looked at.
|
|
|
|
|
I remember reading the exact same thing some time back (probably in last 7 days only!), but I couldn't find it. Was you the one who reported/requested the same thing earlier? Did you deleted the earlier one and reposted today?
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm afraid it has returned to the unfixed state of affairs, probably driven by the popular dislike of magenta everywhere...
I think you need a distinct CSS class for followed hyperlinks, to be used only on pages that would really benefit, i.e. where the links themselves are the purpose of the page, as in Latest Articles. And not in navigation panes or message forums, where the links are rather used like buttons.
|
|
|
|
|
Part of the trick is handling the inconsistency in handling CSS selectors between browsers. I'll go back to tried and true (and tedious) methods and be more selective in which links are to be marked as 'visited'.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Just curious, have you considered having three grades of browsers: A-grade you want to get everything correct on, B-grade you support while accepting some minor defects, C-grade you don't worry about?
or is it just impossible to get the most popular top-3 (I'd guess IE, FF, Chrome) to agree on just anything and into A-grade at the same time?
in fact I would suggest you include something about such intentions in some kind of a public mission statement...
|
|
|
|
|
That's an excellent way of doing it and something we informally do now, as much as possible.
A-grade: Latest Chrome/Safari, Firefox, IE8
B-grade: IE7, Firefox 2X, Opera (though Opera is usually well behaved, give or take)
C-grade: everything else, except
Annoying-grade: IE6.
IE6 is still supported to the extent that the site works, but we make no guarantee of how good it looks. Too many businesses still use it (12%) and it has a 45% adoption rate in China. nuts.
Between the A/B grade browsers we have all sorts of issues. CSS 2+3 support is great in Chrome, OK in Firefox, terrible in IE8. Clipboard handling is great in IE8, bad in Firefox, terrible in Chrome. Rendering / JS execution speed is great in Chrome, OK in Firefox, pretty bad in IE.
IE9 will probably be the gold standard when it comes out, but I'm guessing only briefly. I'll wait and see.
And the idea of a public statement is a good one. I will add this somewhere.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Very interesting. Thanks.
Chris Maunder wrote: Annoying-grade: IE6
|
|
|
|
|
So the fix has been removed? It worked this morning, but now its broken again.
|
|
|
|
|
I regularly want to look up a member by (partial) name, sometimes it works, often it doesn't; it is unreliable and almost useless.
Today I looked for "mahesh" (and "mahesh*") and did get "S Mahesh Reddy" but did not get "Maheshwari" nor "maheshwari.vetri" which was what I wanted to find.
I don't understand what makes it so hard to search a simple text field.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: I don't understand what makes it so hard to search a simple text field.
7.5 million members and a no support for partial word searches in SQL Full Text indexes, and insanely slow searches when doing LIKE scans.
As I have said before: we are working on search. Not a tweak but a complete rewrite.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I understand partial-word searches probably (or even inherently) are slower, however they sometimes work well, and often they don't. That is the puzzling part of it. I saw no indication of a time-out, all I got was a single match within a few seconds.
[ADDED] Seems like partial word search does not work at all any more, appending an asterisk doesn't do a thing, no error message, no change in the results??? (Just tried "Maund*", only found "Jay Maund"). This is new, it has worked before. If you don't support it any more, please put up an error message when one enters an invalid search term. [/ADDED]
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't touched the search, Luc. It's behaving as it's always behaved. I've gone back in the SVN logs to mid 2009 and there's been no change to the way we search by member name.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I'm positive it has worked for me, i.e. without a trailing asterisk, it used to look for full words, and with a trailing asterisk it looked for "starting with...". Which was fine, not perfect, but fine as I usually know how a name (or a name part) starts. In fact, you may even have pointed it out to me long ago, not sure here. I do recall having a similar conversation earlier, when I was looking for Dave K's correct name, however I can't find it right now 
Since it doesn't do "trailing asterisk means starts with..." now, if you haven't changed it, then SQL Server has changed or I'm all wrong? I find that very strange.
|
|
|
|
|
We have upgraded from SQL 2005 to SQL 2008 and then to 2008 R2. A change like this would be a major breaking change so I doubt it would be that.
The main point is that I understand the current system is suboptimal and we are currently working on fixing it.
You're one of our KPIs 
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: You're one of our KPIs
I hope my expectations aren't that exceptional, and it is more me being rather explicit about them...
I just read the first Aimee.NET article, looks promising. Do you have a tentative time schedule?
It also made me wonder how come SQL Server doesn't offer a good solution all by itself. Isn't everyone wanting partial-word search (at least starting-with search)?
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like an interesting challenge. Here is a recommendation for a custom data structure that would allow for quick partial-word matches.
Put all usernames into a tree. There are a few root nodes, one for each character that can be in a username. Each node in the tree builds a portion of a username. So, if you have "Bob", the tree would look like this:
B-+
|
O-+
|
B-+
|
[Data Associated With Bob]
Now, create a tree of partial names. For a username that is 3 letters long, there will be one main entry (in the above tree), and 2 entries in the partial tree:
O-+
|
B-+
|
[Pointer To Data Associated With Bob]
[Poitner To Data Associated With Scrob]
B-+
|
[Pointer To Data Associated With Bob]
[Pointer To Data Associated With Scrob]
[Pointer To Data Associated With Bub]
For a partial-word search, you would look in the partial username tree. If somebody searched for ".ob", you'd look for a root node of "O", then find the "B" child, and find all pointer nodes to find the usernames that end with "ob". You'd also want to search subtrees to find names that contain "ob" followed by more letters. You'd probably want to make some lower limit... say, no fewer than 3 characters can be entered for a partial-name search. This "tree" could be implemented as part of a database. Accounting for typical username length and the number of users, the size of the data would probably be around 15,000,000 units (each unit being, say, 10 bytes).
There are probably better data structures for the more general case, but this would probably work well for short text snippets (as is the case with usernames).
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure we want to reinvent the wheel
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
That calls for:
MARKETING GIRL:
When you have been in marketing as long as I have, you’ll know that before any new product can be developed, it has to be properly researched. I mean yes, yes we’ve got to find out what people want from fire, I mean how do they relate to it, the image -
FORD:
Oh, stick it up your nose.
MARKETING GIRL:
Yes which is precisely the sort of thing we need to know, I mean do people want fire that can be fitted nasally.
CHAIRMAN:
Yes, and, and, and the wheel. What about this wheel thingy? Sounds a terribly interesting project to me.
MARKETING GIRL:
Er, yeah, well we’re having a little, er, difficulty here…
FORD:
Difficulty?! It’s the single simplest machine in the entire universe!
MARKETING GIRL:
Well alright mister wise guy, if you’re so clever you tell us what colour it should be!
|
|
|
|
|
any color you like, as long as it is black. Or has Ford marketing evolved beyond that?
|
|
|
|
|
Then take the bloody training wheels off your search and use something that's all growd up! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wish I had time to refactor open source projects! Awesome!
Does Lucene (now Aimee) support fast partial-word searches?
|
|
|
|
|
According to this, partial word searches in Lucene may be slow for leading wildcards. My "wheel" technique solves that.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
