Encoding Issue
2 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by choroba
on Apr 13, 2021 at 11:23
|
|
ItÂ’s one
After I voted for the node, though, the encoding issue was gone:
It’s one
I made screenshots of both the versions.
Update: I'm using Firefox 78.9.0esr on Linux.
map{substr$_->[0],$_->[1]||0,1}[\*||{},3],[[]],[ref qr-1,-,-1],[{}],[sub{}^*ARGV,3]
|
Internal problem in Montly/Weekly Best
4 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by Discipulus
on Apr 12, 2021 at 04:32
|
|
hello pmdevs
I noticed the following error in nodelets about Montly/Weekly Best, maybe there is some work in progress?
Monthly Best
Internal problem occurred in get_picked_nodes
called with 10 bind variables when 9 are needed
Weekly Best
Internal problem occurred in get_picked_nodes
called with 10 bind variables when 9 are needed
L*
There are no rules, there are no thumbs..
Reinvent the wheel, then learn The Wheel; may be one day you reinvent one of THE WHEELS.
|
Display create date on Selected Best Nodes
No replies — Read more | Post response
|
by afoken
on Apr 10, 2021 at 07:15
|
|
Whenever I browse Selected Best Nodes, I notice that I miss the create date that is included in "Super Search" results, "Nodes You Wrote", etc. Given that Selected Best Nodes may return postings that may be two decades old, the create date gives some context for the postings.
So I propose to add the create date to Selected Best Nodes.
Alexander
--
Today I will gladly share my knowledge and experience, for there are no sweeter words than "I told you so". ;-)
|
The Categorized Questions and Answers section has been decommissioned
1 direct reply — Read more / Contribute
|
by jdporter
on Apr 09, 2021 at 15:47
|
|
Effective today, the section of PerlMonks known as "Categorized Questions and Answers" is no longer in service.
The section page is a tombstone. It is no longer possible to post Categorized Questions or Answers.
It is also not possible to search such posts via Super Search. It wouldn't be useful anyway, because all
of the posts which were Categorized Questions have been converted into SOPW posts.
Likewise, all posts which were Categorized Answers have been converted into replies to those SOPW posts.
In each case, the name of the CatQA 'section' in which the Question was placed has been added to the SOPW post as a keyword.
The intent of the CatQA section will, going forward, be fulfilled by a new system, whereby "good" questions (in SOPW)
and their "best" answers will be given a special flag, as well as relevant keywords.
Some documentation and linkage changes remain to be made. If you see any, feel free to sent a msg to SiteDocClan, pmdev, or gods, depending.
For more information on this change, see prior discussion: RFC: Better Best Answers Gets Real
I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon staffed with 16,000 zombies.
|
Helper script to format code and output to perlmonks markup
No replies — Read more | Post response
|
by LanX
on Apr 04, 2021 at 17:03
|
|
Hi
It's really tedious to need to correct code and example output after spotting a flaw.
That's why I just hacked PM.pl to automatically wrap code-tags around my combined source-file and output, so I just need one copy and paste.
Just put it into the same directory like your other scripts.
Activate it just with do "./PM.pl" inside your source file.
It requires a __DATA__ at the end of your source code and will warn you otherwise
NB: The do PM.pl; is omitted as is __DATA__ if it's the last line.
DEMO:
This
use v5.12;
use warnings;
do './PM.pl';
say for <DATA>
__DATA__
1
2
3
creates
<code>
use v5.12;
use warnings;
say for <DATA>
__DATA__
1
2
3
</code>
OUTPUT: <blockquote><i><code>
1
2
3
</code></i></blockquote>
which renders as
use v5.12;
use warnings;
say for <DATA>
__DATA__
1
2
3
OUTPUT: 1
2
3
PM.pl
The code is pretty self explanatory, you can adjust it to your needs
UPDATE: fixed localization of non-buffering
|
PerlMonks main page: garbled character encoding
1 direct reply — Read more / Contribute
|
by kikuchiyo
on Mar 22, 2021 at 08:24
|
|
When I load the main page, there is a character encoding issue:
Image
Interestingly, it appears normal when I open the link or when I log in.
Firefox also displays this warning on the development tools panel:
"The character encoding of the HTML document was not declared. The document will render with garbled text in some browser configurations if the document contains characters from outside the US-ASCII range. The character encoding of the page must be declared in the document or in the transfer protocol."
|
Proposal: Truncating trailing '(update)' from node-titles in replies
3 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by LanX
on Mar 12, 2021 at 16:22
|
|
Hi
I'd like to propose to truncate any trailing s/\(\s*update.*?\)\s*$//i from node-titles in replies.
Reasoning:
Many, me included, flag important updates to their posts by adding an (updated?) to their titles, which is fine.
But this becomes nonsensical when replies are also named (updated) because it's inherited.
I could provide a patch, now that I've identified the add_re_to_title-code responsible for the Re^n: -parts in the titles.
Examples:
?node_id=3989;HIT=%28update (click search)
Opinions???
|
Whitespace after "Re*:" colon sometimes disappearing
1 direct reply — Read more / Contribute
|
by LanX
on Mar 12, 2021 at 15:14
|
|
something strange is happening (again), and these hick-ups might be a symptom of something worse
What happened to the usual whitespace after the colon?
I already had to fix one of my posts from yesterday, because I blamed myself for erasing it by accident.
But these cases are accumulating.
edit
@pmdevs: see add_re_to_title
|
node 11112212 displayed as empty but its not empty
3 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by Anonymous Monk
on Mar 01, 2021 at 22:29
|
|
|
Necroposting Considered Beneficial
4 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by eyepopslikeamosquito
on Feb 24, 2021 at 23:43
|
|
This topic has been closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.
-- message I saw on trip advisor forum today
Seeing this message today while planning a holiday drive
up the coast of New South Wales
reminded me of a spate of recent PM
necroposts,
such as:
It feels especially eerie when a necroposter responds to a monk
who's not been sighted for so many years that he may well have passed on to become a necromonk.
I get the feeling that necroposts have been on the rise here lately - interested to hear theories why.
(Update: Re^4: Code style advice: where to put "use" statements? indicates that Bod enjoys the Random Node feature in Leftovers on bottom right of PM screen ... perhaps renewed interest in Random Nodes has increased the frequency of necroposts).
Though I found many previous discussions of anonymous posting (see "Previous Anonymous Monk Discussions" section below),
I couldn't find any previous discussions of necroposting. Hence this node.
Though my personal opinion is that necroposts are beneficial,
I'm interested to learn how other monks feel about them
and how they might be improved.
Why I Like Necroposts
As a serious code-golfer for many years I watched in dismay as ... the perl fwp and golf mailing lists died
... the 2002 TPR golf series lasted just one season ... Terje's minigolf site came and went ... as did the kernelpanic.pl
Polish golf site, codegolf.com, phpgolf.org, and many more ... while Perl Monks lives on and on and on!!!
The upside is that PM's extreme longevity, combined with its low barrier to entry for non monks
to post, has resulted in many invaluable nuggets posted by non-Perl-monk code golf experts.
Without PM's low barrier to entry, many of this priceless golfing lore
would have been lost for all time.
While most of these responses were made anonymously (signed with the name of the poster),
I was pleased to see the greatest code golfer I know of, primo,
going to the bother of creating a PM account, solely to respond to PM code golf threads.
Some examples (many more could be given):
- Re: The golf course looks great, my swing feels good, I like my chances (Part I) by robin Dec 20 2009 (and reply on Jul 24 2010) (root: Apr 25 2009)
- Re^2: The golf course looks great, my swing feels good, I like my chances (Part I) Aug 07 2010 (root: Apr 25 2009)
- Re: The golf course looks great, my swing feels good, I like my chances (Part IV) by primo Jun 07 2013 (root: May 10 2009)
- Re: The golf course looks great, my swing feels good, I like my chances (Part VI) Jan 10 2010, updated 2012 (root: Dec 30 2009)
- Re: The golf course looks great, my swing feels good, I like my chances (Part VI) by anony golfer J-_-L Jan 11 2010 (root: Dec 30 2009)
- Re: Drunk on golf: 99 Bottles of Beer by anony golfer dmd Jun 01 2012 (root: May 8 2011)
- Re: Drunk on golf: 99 Bottles of Beer by primo May 23 2016 (root: May 8 2011)
- Re: Compression in Golf: Part I by primo Jul 20 2013 (root: Sep 23 2012)
- Re^2: Compression in Golf: Part III by primo Jan 07 2013 (root: Oct 21 2012)
- Re: Compression in Golf: Part III by anony dmd Mar 30 2013 (root: Oct 21 2012)
- Re: Dueling Flamingos: The Story of the Fonality Christmas Golf Challenge by ambrus May 10 2009 (root: Jan 12 2007)
- Re: Dueling Flamingos: The Story of the Fonality Christmas Golf Challenge by primo Dec 17 2012 (root: Jan 12 2007) - a sensational magic formula breakthrough!
As a final example of valuable necroposting, I've been grateful to jdporter for necroposting
historically priceless nuggets of Perl Monks history to The First Ten Perl Monks (2014):
Possible Necropost Improvements
I suspect some of the recent necroposts (especially the anonymous ones) were made accidentally
(i.e. without the poster being aware they were responding to a thread that was over 10 years old)
... and so wonder if it would be good to provide some sort of warning that you are responding to a really old thread.
Some sort of visual indicator decorating the necropost response itself may further be worth considering,
so that folks viewing recent nodes can easily spot the necroposts.
Necropost References
Previous Anonymous Monk Discussions
Updated: Minor changes to wording and example node list in "Why I Like Necroposts" section.
|
Anonymous Edit
1 direct reply — Read more / Contribute
|
by pryrt
on Feb 23, 2021 at 14:49
|
|
Re: Challenge: Ricochet Robots was an anonymous post that was recently edited (emptied) with no janitation history. But Anonymous Monk cannot edit his own posts. After some back and forth in the CB, the best guess is that the post ran afoul of anti-spam AM-posts-with-links auto-cleaning. Which is fine... but it would be nice to be sure.
More importantly than this specific instance: should there be some sort of indication on such posts, whether in the janitation history or in the body of the emptied post, to indicate that it was auto-cleaned for potential spam? This would give people a chance to weigh in with a consideration-to-edit/restore: "no, I saw the content and followed the link before it was purged: it was a link to a A* algorithm implementation of this problem in another language, which doesn't seem like spam given the conversation". (It's obviously been fixed in this case, but I'm using my reaction to this case to explain the general idea)
|
Anonymous Identifier
6 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by pryrt
on Feb 23, 2021 at 14:32
|
|
Recently, the anonymous account is mostly one infamous user, one detractor who seems to think that every anonymous post (other than his) are by that infamous, and an increasingly-rare useful post.
I understand the desire for an anonymous account -- it lowers the barrier of entry for one-off questions, and it probably helps with GPDR.
But often, especially in the last year or so, it seems to me to be more trouble than it is worth. It allows infamous monks to hide behind a cloak that sometimes (but not always) masks who they are and how dangerous their "advice" is. But it also allows angry monks to carry out vendettas against the infamous monks any time there's a non-zero probability that an anonymous post might be from that infamous monk. And, on those rare occasions when the AM isn't one of those two, it makes it hard to follow questions, "no, I'm not that AM, I am a different one, the one from id://...."
Most forums I've visited don't allow any anonymous posts. Do the negatives here outweigh the positives? And if TPTB don't want to disable AM, could we at least add a non-identifying identifier to AM posts?
Something I've thought of before, I finally suggested in CB after today's anonymous-edit, and am now reiterating here: I would suggest a one-way hash on the IP address -- so it wouldn't tell us who or where the person is, but it would say "this is likely the same AM as from that other post". For the useful AM conversation, it would help other readers follow which AM said what; and for the infamous and his detractor(s), it would make it easier to confirm or deny whether it is likely the same monk or not. Both seem like "wins" to me. I understand that IP addresses can change or be behind big corporate blocks, so it's not a foolproof identifier in either direction (same IP might feasibly be used by good AM and bad AM, or a single AM's IP might change between posts) ... but it might help some. As long as the particular hash is not also applied to logged-in posts, I wouldn't think it would run afoul of GPDR (but, IANAL, so take it for what it's not worth).
Anyway, just an idea I've had, and since there was some support in CB, I finally decided to suggest it officially.
|
Preview for Post Editing
2 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by kcott
on Feb 20, 2021 at 09:26
|
|
|
New posts added earlier in posted list
2 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by kcott
on Jan 22, 2021 at 11:01
|
|
I was just about to post a new SoPW item and noted that
I needed to scroll through lots of old posts.
On commenting on that here (i.e. this PM post), I sill needed to wade through many posts to get to "Post new ...".
My suggestion is that new SoPW, and all other new PM posts, are presented at the top of the list.
Obviously, having been here for over a decade, I'm quite familar with the status quo.
Those, who are newer to the monastery, may well get disoriented negotiating the cloisters:
let's make it easier for them.
Update:
Rewrote title (before any respones) to make intent clearer.
|
Random Nodes are prohibited
3 direct replies — Read more / Contribute
|
by Bod
on Jan 02, 2021 at 15:03
|
|
When I use the Random Node feature, more often than not I arrive at a node which I don't have privileges to view. Whilst this is not a big issue, I suspect it comes from people in pmdev having access to all these prohibited nodes and not seeing the issue.
Either I'm rather unlucky with the random nodes I get served or there are a lot of prohibited nodes in the Monastery.
|