I suggest that the default style sheet be changed to add line numbers to code listings. I've had that set up on my style sheet for quite some time now, and find it pretty convenient.
We frequently have people give us chunks of code and associated error messages whose line numbers don't match the code. Sometimes the querants will annotate their code with a comment telling which line is which. I'm thinking that if they are able to see the line numbers, it may encourage some of the posters to tie the line numbers and error messages together better, possibly reducing one round of questions.
Logged-in users can now apply a css stylesheet to nodes rendered using the 'bare' display style. To do so, go to your Display Settings, and look for the text field labeled "Link to External CSS stylesheet for 'bare' display style:", near the bottom. Only "external" css is supported in this way; the text field's value must be a URL for a page of css.
For starters, here is some simple css which makes it easier to see the tree structure of replies and to distinguish one reply from another:
I must admit that I assumed the Edit feature was a free for all, add-in. It's a nice feature that I alone consider to be a way to ensure that years from now every node contains concise and to the point useful information about "Perl". The Node's history will be of no consequence to anyone looking to solve the same problem later.
IMHO if you want historical information on a node's past edits, there should be a feature for that like on Wikipedia. A separate tab were all the changes can be laid out in chronological order and even a comment on why the change was made. However I do understand that short term knowledge on how a node evolves is essential or at least I can make myself believe this is important and, more importantly, understand the it's important to others.
I looked for such a guide as this thread should evolve to be and didn't find it after 30 seconds, hopefully this thread will be now be in the "I'm feeling lucky" range. As such I do not yet know how to properly format an edit, nothing listed in the obvious place that should list, reference(this node) or contain anything and everything related to formatting a node's content, but currently does not even contain the words edit or modify.
<p>I attempted to make good on my suggestion to read everything on PM. "Tough beans." qw/[id://1] [id://2] [id://3] [id://4] [id://5] [id://6] [id://7] [id://8]/ and at some point, you get bored being told that you need boiling water.</p> Skipping around, 32 64 *128 92 100 PM 101. 107=>The Everything Tourroot Looking for a place to spend that one last vote: 160=>try this on for size?
I think I get how to level once I've reached level 2, you just use up all your votes day after day and eventually you will reach level 6.
Most RPG have a few guides on how to level quickly, though I'm looking for a guide that indicates the right way to level your Monk.
My aim here is for a quick two posts. It's not my intention to spam PM with content below par, though that does seem to be one way to get to level 2. Though it's been pointed out that simply adding nodes will not gain you any XP.
This is a general question not about perl.
Can we have a categorization of questions like beginners, intermediate or expert? I think it would be like following:
Whenever someone asks a question he chooses a category. Because a person, who is asking, knows about himself that he is at beginner or intermediate or expert level. Thus we have a categorization. I think it would be helpful. And we can have a list of topics for each category automatically.
We all know that posts sometimes accidentally get sent from Anonymous Monk because the user's session got logged off. But presumably we still know what IP-address it came from, and that these are likely to be fairly-unique. How about a feature that lets you reclaim an anonymous post that came from your IP? One positive experience-point would be deducted, total not less than zero, so that you could not upvote a post (to find out what the XP count is), then adopt it to promote yourself to the papacy.
Lately, I am seeing a lot of technical comments ... and even entire threads ... which are being made by Anonymous Monk. These are not particularly negative comments. These are not people dodging (or firing ...) the downvote-bullet to protect their precious-to-them reputations. No, nothing “snarky” at all. They are technical comments, and good ones, therefore by-the-way quite worthy of upvotes. In one case today, Anonymous is heard saying, “if you remember my previous post [on the subject].” Problem: how easy is it going to be to find that particular post, and, having found it, to know that it’s the one referred to? Now fast-forward six months ... a year ... the post is long forgot, but an intrepid soul with a problem is doing a Super Search. Can he find your exact comment, quickly, now?
Oops, you see that you made an error. Can you go back and fix it now? Nope! Not good: now, and forevermore, the PM database contains an error, or at least, unfinished business. The post belongs to no-one now. From an information-quality standpoint, that’s not good.
I think that we should strongly encourage people to log in when they post comments. (I have said, before, that I actually don’t like the idea of Anonymous at all ...) But here’s the main reason for my suggestion: if I know who you are, I can search for you. I can find your other posts, probably without trolling through dozens of pages. I can use your name as part of the Super Search criteria. All of which cannot be so-effectively done in the case of our Anonymous brother.
We always need to keep in mind, not just the present, but the future.
More than its dubious value as a social gathering-place for geeks, PM is very much an information resource of very durable, long-lasting value. People do look for information that is months or years old, and find it just as valuable as when it was written, if they can find it and identify it. Therefore, sign your name to your posts. It really isn’t a petty-game of pluses and minuses ... rather, it is something that I think adds real value to your posts when you include it; and removes much of that value when you don’t.
Another, related suggestion would be to emphasize the value of weaving searchable keywords into post responses, especially if the original thread or its title did not include relevant terms. And, to be sure that posts represent complete thoughts, to include not only our suggestions but the context/assumptions in which they are made. Searches consider individual posts, not merely threads. The searcher will encounter the post before s/he encounters its thread context. Therefore, make every post count. Once again, we are pandering to our intrepid Super Searcher from the Future, and in so doing, helping PM to continue to be: “the Go-To Site on the Internet™” for questions regarding Perl and technical computing.