Wedge

I am just glad he's left/gone so I wouldn't abuse the ban stick.  :niark:

@TE> :) (So you didn't read the feature list when I posted it in private last month, did you? :P)What you're saying is very sad. Go to Pete's blog and don't come back until you've read it all. :niark:That has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with my implementation.
Wedge has Double Merge. Enough said.

I'm just peeved that someone is telling me that we should implement feature x when we have feature y, because they do something tangentially related and that without looking at feature x, you're telling me that feature y is automatically better.

Yeah but tangentially is even too 'close' for me... It's really loosely related, in that both the features have 'quote' in their name. :P

This sounds like a great feature, thanks for taking the time to work on it!  :)

+100 Outstanding feature as I do a whole lot of that kind of replying.  :eheh:

Poor notepad won't get used nearly as much.  :o

You used Notepad? Hmm that's an interesting concept but...
Myself, I always use complex copy & pasting to do it quickly and efficiently. It's always the same series of keys to push: ctrl+end, ctrl+shift+left arrow until I reach the beginning of the quote closer, shift+ctrl+end, shift+del, ctrl+home, then everytime I need to split, I do shift+insert, return, return, shift+insert, right arrow, delete, up arrow, type reply.

So it's basically a time saver to have the automatic quote splitter but I'm so used to doing this, I'm the one considering offering an option to turn it off. Well, I'll see how I deal with the simplicity once Wedge.org runs on Wedge. :lol:

This is about me ? I had ever offered.

No, it's not. Nao has talked about this before.

A A A. . . . Clear:) I like that already used, select some text and immediately write a comment. Well will have to get used to and do more movements. Quote all, and then cleaned of superfluous phrases. : (

-sigh- Except that honestly, THIS IS LESS WORK.

You quote the whole message, find the bit you want to reply to, press enter and START REPLYING. No mess, no hassle, no ambiguity and less chance of things being taken out of context.

The only reason you keep pushing your methodology is because you haven't tried this one.

You have to drag+select, click to insert a quote, enter to start a new line then start replying. This... you press ONE BUTTON FOR THE ENTIRE MESSAGE, none of this drag+select+insert for every single paragraph of a big message, which is what it was designed for.

This sort of thinking: that feature x is better than feature y because feature x is what you're used to and expect to have without considering what feature y can do is the main reason I hate developing for other people. I don't like it that people point to another system and say "I want that" without understanding if it even is the best solution to their problem, when invariably it's a solution to someone ELSE's problem, adapted to your use, without being the actual solution to YOUR problem.

You see, what Nao has created is a solution to HIS and MY problem, having a big ol' message and wanting to reply to it paragraph by paragraph. So you press quote once, find the bit you want to reply to, then JUST REPLY. No hassle. It wasn't built for you, but then again neither was the method you keep pointing out as your holy grail. Fortunately for my sanity, our holy grail is not your holy grail, and that we build it how we see fit, not because other people tell us how we should build it. It just so happens that what we build happens to be mostly in sync with what other people want.

We have no qualms about leading and dictating how it's going to go forward. We take into account what people want but ultimately we are building something that we will use ourselves on our production sites, and that is first and foremost to us.

The pretty URLs stuff? Nao wanted that for Noisen. The blogging stuff? Nao wanted it for Noisen, I want it for InI. The quote splitter? Nao wants that for here, amongst other things. (This is how it works: we build it with our own needs in mind, and maybe going a step further, but ultimately to what we want it to do, and not what people keep trying to tell us we should do because somehow someone else's solution to a problem is better... it usually isn't. If it was, we'd have adopted it long ago. We didn't... I wonder why that is.)

I should add, in my previous career, I made a lot of money for myself and my company because I was able to find solutions that solved the problems at hand, rather than solving the symptoms.

Most of the time, the solutions people propose solve the symptoms of a problem, not the actual problem.

Classic example: hide post. The idea is to encourage community contribution, except all it does is encourage people to post one line answers. So you hide content until someone replies, they reply in order to see the content. Yes, you solve the problem of a lack of participation, but now you have a new problem of crap participation. This might solve your problem if you have a very narrow definition but in reality you've traded one thing for another.

Honestly... your solution does that. You trade pressing Ctrl-C then Ctrl-V for pressing a single button with the mouse, hardly an earth shattering change. You're not changing the fact that you're still doing most of the work, rather than letting the computer do some of it for you, and in reality you're not saving a lot of time, because in the time you've moved to press the relevant button, you could just as easily have already pressed Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V, like I normally do with such things. Thus you're altering the symptoms, not solving a problem, and at worst you're pretending that you're making your life better, when you're still doing all the work.

And some people say I have no imagination... honestly, it is this ability to get to the heart of an actual problem that led to me being able to stare down the face of a senior vice president of a former multi-national company, and tell him that he would get his solution implemented, and I quote, "over my dead body". Because, as I later explained and went on to graphically demonstrate, his solution traded one problem for another three, very expensive, very complex to implement and support problems, and even then it didn't really solve the problem in the first place, that of system integration.

And no, that argument was not the reason I left; I left a few months (and many grey hairs) later once the company started to implode, because their disjointed, broken thinking was rife throughout the entire company, and I left 3 months before they collapsed.

Pete, don't get extra grey hair over Makar ;)
You'll have to live with the fact that he's obviously not very skilled at English and he just doesn't get it. Once he sees Wedge in action, he'll probably get it. Or not. Either way, don't sweat it! I'm sure he doesn't intend to be a PITA. At least not consciously ;)

This is a great idea.  :)

Since I lost 80% of the use to my left hand I found myself taking much longer to type up anything. So copying a post to notepad allows me to edit at my speed.

But I always copied the "quote=author link=msg" yadda yadda, and pasted it above the selected paragraphs I wanted to quote.

Ctrl C and Ctrl V are used a lot, as they are easy for my left hand to reach.

That said, did I say how much I really like your idea though? Probably not, I'm not that much of a chatterbox any longer.