Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Arantor
361
Antechinus said something interesting - and useful.
Quote
Just had an idea and messed around with it a little bit. Since anyone using a decent browser these days is already used to having the nifty textarea click and drag resize by default (ie: without relying on 2.0's legacy code) it occurred to me that having the same resize ability on code blocks could be handy at times.
All it needs is the CSS3 resize property set to 'vertical'.
Quote
Not quite sure how to handle this at the moment. I'm certainly not planning on committing it to svn, but it's a nice touch in FF4 or Webkit as you can set the default height to whatever and then just drag when necessary. Might make a handy Greasemonkey addition for peeps on FF4 or Webkit. Just a thought.

ETA: Actually jQuery could probably handle this for all browsers, including auto shrink for height with one or two line snippets. < 2.1 feature
I took a few minutes out and stretched my brain, was quite nice.
Quote
Eh, what the hell.

Code: [Select]
// ==UserScript==
// @name           Code Block Resizer
// @namespace      http://www.simplemachines.org/
// @description    Adds the fancy resize element
// @include        http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=*
// ==/UserScript==

var divX = document.evaluate("//code[@class='bbc_code']", document, null, XPathResult.ORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE, null);

if (divX.snapshotLength > 0)
for (i = 0, n = divX.snapshotLength; i < n; i++)
divX.snapshotItem(i).style.resize = 'vertical';

Didn't really want to make it work on lots of forums since the @include could easily hit way too many sites and slow them all down.


EDIT: I don't think jQuery can actually handle this for browsers that don't have the feature or something relating to it. But it IS a one-liner in jQuery if you go down that road:
Code: [Select]
$('code.bbc_code').css('resize', 'vertical');

Anything else is getting overly technical, I suspect, and unreliable when you consider how themers will want to play.
I don't write GM nearly enough.
362
Features / Blogging features
« on January 29th, 2011, 11:05 PM »
I spent a little time recently looking at WP's admin panel and some of the funtionality that I never really looked before which I do have to wonder about, for those who come from WP.

For the majority of people coming from WP, the key things that they're most worried about are SEO, ease of posting/attaching files and add-ons - in that order. SEO we can do something with - and I do even wonder about full on 'SEO' URLs (i.e. no ids present in the URLs) for that, but that's something I'm not quite so worried about.


So, the features that jump out of me from WP:
* Posting from email (not sure *how* it does it but I get the impression it doesn't have any of the usual fuss related to posting via email that you can trivially find on sm.org, with email configuration - the admin panel talks about just using POP3, which means I think we're talking regular lookups to the POP3 server)

* XML-RPC - for creating other clients (it probably isn't a bad idea to have something suitable for this purpose)

* Threaded comments

* OMG OMG TEH LEET SEO
363
FAQs / [FAQ] Why are there so many features? / Isn't that bloated?
« on January 19th, 2011, 12:11 PM »
This is a very tough question to answer. Certainly there are a lot of features in Wedge that many will not use - not every forum owner wants to have a blog system built in, for example. Nor the calendar, nor <insert feature here>

But big features like that - like blogging support, like the gallery, like the calendar - these are features we have in the core so that we can maintain them. All too often mods get neglected over time - having them in the core means they don't get forgotten about.

The calendar is a particularly odd example: many SMF users didn't want the calendar in the core, it being a feature they didn't use. But there is another group of people who would actually go elsewhere if the calendar were removed/left to be neglected. These people love having it available and want it to be more powerful than it was.

So the approach we've gone for is that we've added these features in, but in a way that we hope doesn't make it feel too big or scary - and kept the performance aspect too.


Interesting parallel, really, is Microsoft Word. Word adds new features every release, and while some consider it bloaty, the bottom line is that any user might only use 10% of its features - but if each user uses a different 10%, it caters to a lot more people as a result - and this is something we've tried to keep in mind.

We're not going to add every little thing we've thought of - and there are plenty of things we've rejected from being in the core for just that reason. But the goal we have is to make it easier to make them as add-ons that 'just work' and require little maintenance over time.

What will likely happen is that once the core is stable and the ability to expand it through add-ons is mature enough, I'll start turning some of the 'would be nice to have, but not in core' things into add-ons, but we'll see how that turns out - it really requires the core to be mature enough to achieve that first.
364
Off-topic / Quote of the day
« on January 19th, 2011, 08:48 AM »
http://www.simplemachines.org/community/index.php?topic=415861.msg2919868#msg2919868
Quote
I am getting too much sperm registration too. Please help me out to resolve this issue urgently.
Not entirely sure that's *quite* what protection is needed for :lol:
365
Features / How about PMs being listed in Core Features?
« on January 18th, 2011, 12:32 PM »
How about we list personal messages in the Core Features page?

I'm just thinking I've come across cases where the admin didn't want it to be available at all, and while it can be disabled for users through permissions, the tab is still visible to admins.
366
Off-topic / No, really, wait, what?
« on December 21st, 2010, 11:40 PM »
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/21/microsoft_unveils_html5_labs/

This is an interesting concept. I don't just mean the nature of the article, HTML5 Labs, I mean the whole U-turn MS has been doing in favour of actually following standards.
367
Off-topic / PHP 5.3
« on November 12th, 2010, 12:21 AM »
I've been looking at PHP 5.3 today, never really touched it before since prior to what I'm doing this moment, everything had to be reasonably compatible, which meant being less bleeding edge, but what I'm working on tonight is something I'm running myself so I thought I'd look at PHP 5.3.

Overall, vs 5.2 there's little there I think I'd use but it's nice to see some of what they're adding. What did catch my eye however, was this: http://uk2.php.net/manual/en/control-structures.goto.php

The picture at the bottom for one, but more relevantly, why the hell did PHP's devs think adding goto was a GOOD idea?! Seriously... I haven't yet found a situation in PHP where a goto would be the truly best answer.

I foresee this causing lots of bad mojo with PHP which it was doing so well at shaking off.
368
Off-topic / This is how I feel about IE
« on November 11th, 2010, 02:18 PM »
For the project I've been on for 2 1/2 months, I'm slowly getting towards a resolution, which is rather nice, but the hardest part of what I've been doing is compositing divs in the DOM. (Don't worry if that sounds technical; it's just a fancy way of saying about putting what look and act like mini-windows into the page and making them sort of independently manipulatable)

But IE keeps coming back to bite me in the ass; I do the principle dev in Firefox, test in Opera, Safari, Chrome - works fine. But IE8? I've had to fudge so many little bits and pieces just for IE's stupidity (like for instance, a lack of max-height... it's been in the specification for YEARS)

So when in doubt...


IE is Being Mean to Me
369
FAQs / [FAQ] Will my SMF mods and themes work?
« on November 10th, 2010, 02:49 PM »
We've been asked this more than once, so I thought it was about time I answered it.

The short answer is no: SMF mods and themes will not work properly on Wedge without significant overhaul, and this is completely intentional.

It's not about being petty and intentionally breaking it just to annoy people, there are major factors that we sat down - both of us being experienced mod writers - and decided we wanted to tackle.


SMF mods explicitly rely on the code, a mod package is really just a set of find/replace instructions on the code. The only way to retain a reasonable level of compatibility with SMF mods is to not change the code. It isn't ideal, of course, but it is the only way to go about that in the SMF world.

This causes multiple problems, file permissions giving everyone grief, as well as more and more mods being installed causes them to collide further and further until the point where mods just refuse to install because the code they look for has already been installed.

Add to that, that mods on custom themes are at best variable in terms of success and you find yourself in a world of hassle after a while, even when you're using mods written by people who know the code well enough to avoid most of the trouble.


The consequence is a serious amount of rearchitecting the core of SMF in Wedge, to make it far less dependent on mods having to edit the code itself. The downside is that in the short term, users may find a restricted choice of features available to them, while modders learn how to leverage the power of modding in Wedge without code editing.

As for themes, the amount of change is smaller, but still we've made a large number of changes to the default theme, meaning that any theme will need reworking for Wedge as well, but the compatibility should be greater in the long term.


tl:dr; No, themes and mods won't work. But for the hassle of modders and themers learning how to work on Wedge, everyone wins because you'll be able to drop things in with less hassle (if they're written properly), and both the modders and themers should find there is a lower support requirement because the base is that much more flexible.
Also, we will document the main changes we made, so that modders can easily adapt to them.
370
Features / Scheduled tasks interface
« on October 29th, 2010, 01:02 PM »
Two things should be done with scheduled tasks.

Firstly, there should be an extra field which holds the name of a file to load that contains the scheduled task function, so it doesn't have to be added to a file that will be known to be loaded when AutoTask() runs (i.e. ScheduledTask.php IIRC)

Secondly, there should be some kind of interface for the admin to actually add a new task that follows the above. Not quite sure how that squares out with respect to language strings, mind, but perhaps we could have each scheduled task broken into its own subfolder with its own language strings or something. Don't know yet about that (or maybe, just add the scheduled task's name/description into the DB)
371
Off-topic / Truest xkcd yet
« on October 25th, 2010, 08:40 PM »
http://xkcd.com/810/

There is nothing more to add to this comic, IMO.
372
Features / Recycling board by default
« on October 18th, 2010, 02:38 PM »
What do people think about having a recycle board set by default on new installs?
373
Off-topic / 8 Bits
« on October 17th, 2010, 08:30 PM »
For those who know me, I have a thing about retro gaming, about emulation.

This sums it up pretty nicely.


8BITS
374
Off-topic / When you run out of ids...
« on October 12th, 2010, 04:19 PM »
We all know bad stuff happens when you run out of ids in a column. Sometimes it happens in unexpected ways.

Like http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/12/bi_tagging/ for instance. That 2.1 billion limit just happens to be the upper limit on a signed INT column... (32 signed int, caps at 2,147,483,647)

Never let us forget the expected data size in any column!