|
Toronto is closing down because of either the G20 or earthquake fear. Not sure which at the moment. 
Chris Meech
I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. [Yogi Berra]
|
|
|
|
|
I noticed it some time back... but was just being lazy putting it up here!
I found that, whenever we search something, lets say "Multiselect", i get around 8 pages. I move on to page 2... 3....4. I get what i was searching for and thus open that in a new window. (Please note i am currently at page 4.)
Now I go ahead and change the search text to "Cascading", in total 16 pages are returned. But by default i am on page 4 only. Though i searched something new, i was still at the old page number (it's expected that after a new page, pagenumber is reset to 1)
Consequences:
1. I searched 'Multiselect' went till page 4, couldn't find my stuff. Thought of adding more words to search criteria.
2. Without moving to page 1, being at page 4, i just go ahead and type 'Multiselect Dropdown'
3. I get 'No results for this search have been found.'
This is WRONG. Actually there are two pages and around 14 search results. Now since i was at page 4 before searching this text, internally it tried to show page 4 of the new search result which does not exists and thus 'No result'
This needs a fix! i.e. Page needs a reset to zero whenever a new text is searched.
modified on Thursday, June 24, 2010 5:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
Good catch.
|
|
|
|
|
Who would vote that a 1.
Have a 5 to compensate
(Must be a member around my reputation score since the outcome is a nice 3)
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed. Will upload in the next day or so.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Using the platinum members "Uploads" feature (in its current state) isn't viable for what I have in mind, and neither is creating unfinished articles, so I propose the following:
I have an idea regarding the programming forums - add the ability to attach a single file to an original post. To avoid using up disk space, automatically delete the uploaded file after a reasonable period of time - like maybe 2 days. This way, if someone posted a message and needed to upload code for someone to look at, the OP could go back and attach a small file.
Here are some rules I would suggest:
0) Only allow the file to be attached to the original message. This will prevent other users from
1) Allow the OP to re-attach a file if necessary
2) Restrict the file size to 1MB
3) Only allow ZIP files
4) Scan the zip file for EXE and DLL files (and other file types that are used to convey viruses), and reject the upload if the ZIP contains any of the banned file types.
5) Kill the upload after N days (the user can always re-attach a file if the question hasn't been answered).
6) Any message older than 30 days would not allow further file attachments.
7) If the user wishes to attach a different file, the previously attached file is deleted.
This would allow a more collaborative aspect to the programming forums.
EDIT =================
Three days and no comments?
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
modified on Friday, June 25, 2010 8:52 AM
|
|
|
|
|
I was replying to a CCC guess, and merely said "No."
The Already Posted message appeared.
Now it could be that I have on previous days on other threads posted "No.", but not on this one.
I took the period off and it worked.
Shouldn't the checker differentiate between threads/dates?
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: Shouldn't the checker differentiate between threads/dates?
I'm sure it does. I'm using a couple of standard replies (e.g.: you're welcome.) without any such problem, unless repeated inside the same thread.
I would consider it a minor improvement if it would just check to what exact message is being replied. That would solve your "No!" problem.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a theory.
Luc Pattyn wrote: unless repeated inside the same thread.
All my CCC's are Thread Entitled 'CCC', so when it checks, maybe it counts yesterdays 'CCC' thread the same as today's.
Perhaps if I CCC [Date] it would correct the problem
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: I have a theory.
I know you have more than one.
Dalek Dave wrote: Perhaps if I CCC [Date] it would correct the problem
Perhaps indeed.
There are several alternatives:
1. make them somewhat easier, so you don't need no reply "No" all the time.
2. be more creative, don't just answer "No", try adding an eloquent pleasantry.
3. put the clue in the subject line, making it a tiny bit easier for all of us, as now the clue is always present, even when it takes page upon page to converge to a solution.
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: yesterdays 'CCC' thread the same as today's.
I would find them a lot easier if the actual CCC was the same as yesterdays too.
|
|
|
|
|
It would still stump a few of them.
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
You would soon discover the solution is different each day anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
I think Chris has finally implemented the "Dave Must Be Drunk Again" filter.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
There's nothing clverer than a drunk. The more I try and filter him, the more the slippery bastard slips through
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks, gets my 5!
------------------------------------
I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave
|
|
|
|
|
I recently got voted up on a Lounge message and my rep points went up by 20 (or 25) points (I think).
Is everything working ok with the points system?
BTW - I dont mind if they aren't - I just went up by 20 points .
|
|
|
|
|
There is one small issue with points being awarded in the wrong category - but in your case it could simply be a platinum level member upvoted you.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: but in your case it could simply be a platinum level member upvoted you
If a platinum member upvotes me I get more points?
Wow - that is cool. I did not know that. I just thought points were awarded in the range 1 to 5.
|
|
|
|
|
Your message gets points in the 1-to-5 range.
Your message getting a 4 or a 5 also gives you 5 rep points in some category (depends on forum and message type), multiplied by the color factor of the voter.
Most of that is explained in the FAQ[^], IIRC the color factor isn't.
BTW: your auditor joke in the Lounge already has 24 votes!
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks.
Luc Pattyn wrote: IIRC the color factor isn't.
Yes - the "multiplication" factor isn't explained on the FAQ.
Luc Pattyn wrote: BTW: your auditor joke in the Lounge already has 24 votes!
Yes I noticed. That's being doing pretty well.
I guess no one likes the IRS or its equivalent in their countries...
|
|
|
|
|
Its very irritating that only 10 appears per page, I mean first read 10 then click on next then read...so if there is an option about items count per page, it would be nice
TVMU^P[[IGIOQHG^JSH`A#@`RFJ\c^JPL>;"[,*/|+&WLEZGc`AFXc!L
%^]*IRXD#@GKCQ`R\^SF_WcHbORY87֦ʻ6ϣN8ȤBcRAV\Z^&SU~%CSWQ@#2
W_AD`EPABIKRDFVS)EVLQK)JKQUFK[M`UKs*$GwU#QDXBER@CBN%
R0~53%eYrd8mt^7Z6]iTF+(EWfJ9zaK-iTV.C\y<pjxsg-b$f4ia> -----------------------------------------------
128 bit encrypted signature, crack if you can
|
|
|
|
|
I'll add this to the TODO
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
