http://www.perlmonks.org?node_id=581660


in reply to Node ids by node titles

Add [id://`id`] to your Free Nodelet Settings and (if it's not already) turn it on in Nodelet Settings.

Update: Golly, the mess you can stir up by answering something quickly when half awake in the small hours of the morning! First off I didn't grok the question so I answered what I though it said, not what it actually said. Then I looked at the Node Status nodelet, but decided OP didn't have it available for some reason (note the first problem). Then I remembered I had something like the magic string in my Free Node (for reasons I don't recall) so I cargo culted that into an answer.

monarch's question is good and McDarrens solution looks like a good way of avoiding updating any PM code.

I leave you to ponder what else could be put in back ticks in a string that PM will render as HTML. ;)

DWIM is Perl's answer to Gödel

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: Node ids by node titles
by ikegami (Patriarch) on Nov 01, 2006 at 17:03 UTC
    The Status Nodelet also provides that (but not what the OP suggests) out of the box.
[reply]
Re^2: Node ids by node titles
by jdporter (Paladin) on Nov 01, 2006 at 12:46 UTC

    That doesn't do what the OP is asking for.

[reply]

      I disagree. This does do what the OP asked for, but with a caveat. If you do as Grandfather suggested, you will have a nice [id://XXXX] string in your Personal Nodelet for the root node, but not all sub-nodes. Solution: just click on the sub node, load the page, and your Personal Nodelet will be updated accordingly. Problem: you do introduce another server hit, but is it really that big of a deal?

      I think the best solution is what McDarren suggested: Monk Links - Copy Perlmonks-links to the clipboard in on-site-format. And by the way, don't you think a /msg to Grandfather would have been a bit more tactful than simply replying with "you are wrong" and not adding a solution yourself?

      UPDATE: I'm sorry, but there is this little saying called "There is more than one way to do it." Grandfather merely offered what he thought was an acceptable work around. I simply took this a bit further to show how the work around could be applied so that OP could get the info they needed. There is nothing wrong nor right about this. I hate to do this but thanks to jdporter's reply below, i would like to point out jdporter's original reply to Grandfather.

      jeffa

      L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L--
-R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR
B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B--
H---H---H---H---H---H---
(the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)
[reply]
        I agree with jdporter. It's faster manually copying and pasting the link and creating an [id://] tag from it than to load up a PM page. The OP proposes something even easier and faster.
[reply]
[d/l]
        . . . for the root node, but not all sub-nodes. . . .

        In other words, it utterly does not do what the OP asked for.

        And your workaround is (if I may speak for the OP) also not acceptable.

        you do introduce another server hit, but is it really that big of a deal?

        I don't think he's concerned about the server hit; he's concerned about his convenience, particularly considering how slow it can be to load a PerlMonks page, as well as having to go Back or close temporary browser windows.

        McDarren's suggestion is the only really good one (aside from implementing the OP's idea).

        Personally, I don't think the OP's idea is that bad. But given the existence of Monk Links - Copy Perlmonks-links to the clipboard in on-site-format, it doesn't seem particularly critical.

        We're building the house of the future together.
[reply]

In Section Perl Monks Discussion