|
Had an email plus 2 Notifications that a comment had been added to my solution at
SQL query to select data with same date[^] but no comment is showing. I replied to the original post but my comment also not appearing - got a message about the hamsters being overworked and it had been tried undefined times.
May be a refresh issue as the site is very laggy today (see report below) but over 7 hours difference in email timing and me checking.
Let me know if you need any other info
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like ALL comments are missing!
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure if it is an issue on codeproject side or on my side (although I am not having problems with other surfing), but the response of the site today is pretty slow
EDIT 3:
First edit got error message when posting and second time I could not even post a link because the linkify-script got frozen. I pasted the URL, it disappear as usually but no "busy clock" came, and I waited some minutes, before canceling the process
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.
modified 11-Dec-20 3:04am.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We had a caching server go down. It should be good now.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, it is much better now.
One question... I posted 3 messages in the S&A Forum that are missing. Can you find them out? One got reported anyways, but the other two spammers are getting an extra life without them.
Postings should have been some minutes before the OP in this thread.
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’ve refreshed the S&A cache, and your messages are there.
"Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana."
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you.
I had already found a way to find out who they were, but I didn't know if the issue was only caching or anything else, that's why I told you.
Glad everything is back 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Dave replied to keymasher (message subsequently removed), but somehow it's become attached to a different thread. Or appears to be...
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Looks like a case of careful timing: the reply message was posted while the offending message was being deleted.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: a case of careful timing
I'm stealing that phrase!
Cheers,
Peter
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
It's turning this:
<div>
<div style="clear:both;"/>
</div>
Into this:
<div>
<div style="clear:both;"> </div>
Needless to say, it's crapping all over my article content when it does that.
EDIT =================
The article editor does not match the preview
When I published my article all of the images disappeared.
It's clearly valid html, and to "fix" it so I can submit my article, I have to put a blank line were it's trying to artificially insert one.
What ever happend to the checkbox that said "Don't mess with my markup"? This is annoying as hell.
Here's the article - Entity Factory - Get Your ORM-less Freak On![^]
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
modified 9-Dec-20 18:19pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem is almost certainly that your article contains the phrase sucks donkey balls, and in oversized red type to boot! 
EDIT: Might I be so presumptuous as to suggest rephrasing it as sucks the Big One, an expression much beloved by one of my former managers?
|
|
|
|
|
Greg Utas wrote: he problem is almost certainly that your article contains the phrase sucks donkey balls
I'm a truth teller. Sometimes, that violates sensitivities. That can't be helped.
Everyone will miss me when I'm gone.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately DIV tags are not self closing, so the wizard will auto-correct the HTML.
better to do
<tag style="clear:both">
content
</tag>
Than an empty DIV block. This way there are no extra divs
#realJSOP wrote: When I published my article all of the images disappeared
You need to ensure you reference images as src="image.ext", instead of the full path. Images move around. They get bored and restless. Referring them by name not path means they will be referenced in the article correctly.
There are a couple of other things I fixed, and a couple of code changes I'll add to fix a couple of odd issues your article raised.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: empty DIV blocks / self-closing
I wonder if I've ever know that... I built the HTML in the project, and Visual Studio didn't flag that (self-closing DIV) as an error. Bug in VS?
The really weird part is that when I previewed, and it mangled the article, I went back to the editor, and it had took all the missing div end tags and put them at the end of the article.
BTW, I always edit my articles in source mode.
Chris Maunder wrote: You need to ensure you reference images as src="image.ext", instead of the full path
Ahhhh, I thought using the full path would more reliably find the images.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
BTW, thanks for fixing it for me.
I have one more question...
Despite the width being specified to be 240px (like all the rest of the images), the first image is displaying much larger than the rest. Why is it doing that? Do I need to put a "first image" in there to make it leave all of the other images alone?
BTW, this seems contrary to the purpose of the Preview functionality that's available while you're editing, because the preview version of the page doesn't match the editor (which shows the image the desired size).
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
#realJSOP wrote: the first image is displaying much larger than the rest
Welcome to my world. I've thought about creating a 1-pixel high white line and putting it at the top of my articles that contain graphics to see if it fixes this bug. 
|
|
|
|
|
Point me to an article that's having issues and I'll take a look.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
This[^] is one of them. The width of the first image is set to 600, the same as the others, but displays as 720. It looks fine when previewed, so something is changing during submission.
|
|
|
|
|
This image[^]?
In my browser it's displaying at 700 wide (and smaller on small devices) but click it and you get the full 720 wide image in a popup
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it's originally 720 pixels wide, but so are all the other images. They look a bit large in articles, so I scale them down to 600. But the first image insists on being 720 wide.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't follow. You tried to fix it, but you don't think it worked? The image is 720 pixels wide, but so are all the others. I set all of them to 600 pixels in the article editor, and all but the first one display at 600.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't touch the images, so no change
You said "so I scale them down to 600" which I assumed to mean you physically created images that were 600px wide and then uploaded them. I assume you mean you set the width attribute on the IMG tag at 600 to have the browser scale it.
In that case, I'll dig in and see why it's showing at 720.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
