Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
XP is just a number

Re: Readmore revisited...

by ehdonhon (Curate)
on Oct 30, 2003 at 20:30 UTC ( #303401=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Readmore revisited...

A while ago, there was a discussion here about enforcing readmore tags in long posts. It was basically shot down under that node as difficult to implement (though a few other reasons were mentioned).

The neat thing about discussions around here is that they can be shot down completely one week, and then brought up by somebody else in the next week and ++'ed to one of the Best Nodes.

I have seen people that maintain the code here comment that it wouldn't be too hard to write something to auto-add readmore's. The harder task is agreeing how it should work.

I ++ you for presenting your idea, even though I don't think I like it. It relies on the end user to know how to do the right thing with both of those text boxes, just like the present system relies on the end user to know how to use readmore's. Better to find a progmatic solution.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Readmore revisited...
by Jenda (Abbot) on Oct 31, 2003 at 21:56 UTC

    I don't think a programatic solution would work well. What I think could work quite well and doesn't seem to be too hard to implement or to be too hard on the server would be to show something like
    Your post is kinda long. Please consider adding a <readmore> tag!
    on top of the preview page if the text is longer than X characters. That way you get a warning (or information that something like <readmore> exists), but it's up to you whether and where do you add the tag.

    Always code as if the guy who ends up maintaining your code will be a violent psychopath who knows where you live.
       -- Rick Osborne

    Edit by castaway - changed code-tag around the readmore to html-escaped <, >

    Edit by castaway: Closed small tag in signature

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://303401]
[oiskuu]: The useful bits that relate to your process can be found under /proc/self. What information are you thinking of? Tty name?
[tye]: I just daemonized and getlogin() still knew who I had been.
[tye]: perhaps loginuid ? Not that I concede that something not being in /proc means it is not useful.
[Corion]: tye: That's really interesting, but maybe it is because getlogin() returns the name, or the uid, so if that user has been replaced by another user with the same uid in the meantime, that's no problem to the system...
[davido]: or on ubuntu /var/run/utmp
[Corion]: Otherwise, I would imagine that a user with a process still alive would lock that information in memory.
[davido]: so last -f /var/run/utmp on ubuntu provides similar (though more verbose) info
[oiskuu]: glibc getlogin just does ttyname() and falls back on getutline(); it's not security related at all. (reminds me of sendmail and remote finger services of the naive early spam era)
[Corion]: But yes, "who started this process" is interesting information :)
[tye]: no, I really believe that "login user" was added as a fundamental bit of info about each process in order to enhance the usefulness of auditing

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others pondering the Monastery: (8)
As of 2017-06-23 19:36 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    How many monitors do you use while coding?

    Results (554 votes). Check out past polls.