|
|
I see both the articles in discussion here are published now but the published date is shown as 1 Jan 1900.
I know that OG mentioned about dates earlier but it was for an article that missed approval process because of it where as, here these articles are already published.
Bug?
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks. I can now see the article in my list of articles.
FYI, Sandeep is right, my original pub date still shows as 31 Dec 1899.
Thanks to all who helped me with this.
|
|
|
|
|
We're looking into the cause of the date issue now.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Chris, I have posted an article(How does it work in C#? - Part 3 (C# Linq in detail)
) on 13th May 2012. In the article first post date is showing 13th May 2012 but update date is 1 Jan 1900. As a result, this article is not showing on the latest article section of the codeproject. Hope you could help me, plz. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Sandeep and Chirs. I can see my article now 
|
|
|
|
|
The following happens when trying to update my article in the online editor:
1. I am using an up-to-date version of Chrome
2. I open the Article I wish to edit (In this case my MineCraft Server Management program)
3. I place the text cursor in front of a bullet point (numbered bullet point)
4. I press and hold the Ctrl key then press the left arrow key
Result: Chrome shows its "Aww Snap" page - the entire page is broken by this one simple (unintentional) command (I had meant to press and hold ctrl + shift). Anyway, since this causes such a mjor break in the page I thought I'd submit a bug report so here it is.
Hope this gives enough info - it's not a very insightful result but a pretty major one...
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
I wish - I really wish - that I could claim responsibility for killing Chrome.
Unfortunately I think this is something that I will, again, have to cede to Google's coders.
(And I'm not just saying that because my Galaxy Tab is the most flaky tablet I've ever used in my life.  )
[Edit: what's really cool is that if you have a bunch of other tabs open every single one of them breaks too. I thought the whole thing with Chrome's tabs was that they were separate processes and hence Immune From Destruction. Or something.]
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Take a look at the messages on my tip, Call a C# Method From JavaScript Hosted in a WebBrowser. Most of these were converted to messages from the older comment system. There seems to be a lack of hierarchy in most of them (e.g., replies are thread starters rather than reply messages). Also, the commenting system was in reverse order (newer messages were toward the bottom), and that made them more like conversations that could be read through chronologically in a natural manner. That sense of chronology is lost in the new format.
My suggestion to fix these issues is this. Put all of the messages that were converted from comments into a single thread. Perhaps give the thread starter message the title "Classic Comments" (or something like that) and a body explaining the old comment system and why some of the messages may appear jumbled. This would make people aware of why the messages have issues and it would put them in the previous order (newer lower).
|
|
|
|
|
We were going to do that but there were many comment threads that were on totally different topics and so deserved to be in separate threads. Remember that we only added hierarchy after many posts had already been posted.
In your specific case it looks like the comments were transferred over incorrectly. We'll get that sorted out. (sorted? Geddit?)
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds very sordid. I hope none of the messages get sworded. What field are you going to use to sort, id?
Sorry for that. That didn't make your brain sore, did it? I'd prefer to have soared it. 
|
|
|
|
|
That's all sorta wrong.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
This article[^] is an update to an existing one. However, following the link to the original shows it to have been published on 31 Dec 1899.
Programming is work, it isn't finger painting. Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
So, it's a bit ahead of it's time, what's the biggie?
|
|
|
|
|
What a productive person the author is. I see that the update was published on 1st January 1900.
Henry Minute
Girl: (staring) "Why do you need an icy cucumber?"
“I want to report a fraud. The government is lying to us all.”
I wouldn't let CG touch my Abacus!
When you're wrestling a gorilla, you don't stop when you're tired, you stop when the gorilla is.
Cogito ergo thumb - Sucking my thumb helps me to think.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you think the clock hamster has fallen out of his wheel?
Programming is work, it isn't finger painting. Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
Time travel and aliens?
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"It is the celestial scrotum of good luck!" - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
"But you probably have the smoothest scrotum of any grown man" - Pete O'Hanlon (2012)
|
|
|
|
|
I think my suggestion above is more likely. 
Programming is work, it isn't finger painting. Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
No, it was actually Time travelling aliens. But we've fixed the problem.
Richard MacCutchan wrote: Programming is work, it isn't finger painting
What an incredibly depressing outlook. I'm guessing what the context was, but I really like to think of programming as enjoyable, creative art (which can be very hard, but rewarding) work, and not merely "work" as in "a thing I do 9-5 that's hard and for which I get a paycheque to pay the bills".
Maybe it's just because it's Spring outside...
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
The comment was quite apposite in the response where it was first posted.
Programming is work, it isn't finger painting. Luc Pattyn
|
|
|
|
|
I created the following article ( http://www.codeproject.com/script/Articles/ArticleVersion.aspx?waid=12302&aid=382389[^] )
via the Wizard but it seems to be stuck in the composing state, even though I've hit the publish button.
Also, the main problem is that the article does not show up anywhere in my profile -- neither under My Articles nor Submitted Articles.
Is there a problem or is it awaiting authorization from someone? Thanks for any help.
|
|
|
|
|
Before pressing the Publish button did you check the "I have read and agree to the contributor's agreement"?
|
|
|
|
|
That's a good question. I did click the "I have read and agree to the contributor's agreement".
Additional notes: Originally I posted this article for publishing on 05/10 and I failed to save the link so I had no way to get to the article until -- fortunately -- someone else --somehow-- saw the pre-published article and posted a comment on it. When they did that it provided me a link to the article in my email.
However, I still have no other way to get to the article -- it's missing from my profile.
Thanks again for comment.
|
|
|
|
|
Since I can get to the article via that link I tried clicking the Update link, then I made sure that the option
Work in progress: don't publish
Uncheck to publish
is unchecked.
I also insured that the licensing option (I have read and agree to the contributor's agreement) was checked.
Then I did a preview and noticed that the download links seem to fail with the error :
No download file was specified.
But, then I went ahead and clicked the Publish button again.
That puts it back in "Composing" mode.
However, at that point the download links do work.
Thanks for any help.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
