NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
--Larry Wall in eval.c from the perl source code
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
F1rst P0st! (Score:1, Interesting)
Thoughts (Score:1, Interesting)
Beta Hook (Score:1, Interesting)
Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
-- Abigail
What about PRE? (Score:1, Interesting)
However, the list of allowed HTML doesn't allow PRE. But I guess we could (mis)use UL for indented code.
-- Abigail
Re:Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
If you want to discuss the merits of this as the default design, well, we have a whole site devoted to the Slash code [slashcode.com] that you can go to.
And which tags did you have that didn't get used? FONT tags are not allowed, if that is what you tried.
Re:Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
All I used were simple P tags.
-- Abigail
Re:What about PRE? (Score:1, Interesting)
indents just work when not using HTML formatted.
And if you use extrans, you can even use < and > and & without manually encoding them.
I wonder if maybe using Extrans should automatically wrap the post in <TT>, so it will be monospaced? What do you think?
Re:Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
P tags appear to work fine for me, using HTML Formatted.
*shrug*
Re:Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
Blah, testing, blah, testing... (Score:1, Interesting)
Yeay! It works.
Hmmm - nice! (Score:1, Interesting)
However, the slashboxes for perlmonth and perl.com are very good, as is the CPAN and site searches (well, assuming they work they're good - I've not tried).
Groovy.
Top level icons (Score:1, Interesting)
Have you thought of providing a
Adding a favicon.ico doesn't hurt non-IE5 users, but makes
Re:Hmmm - nice! (Score:1, Interesting)
Module discussions? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Module discussions? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
The odd thing is, when I go to slashdot.org, I don't see the tiny letters all over like I see here. But maybe they don't use the same code as they released....
Another thing. If you go to a page with comments, on the top, at the right, there are two boxes one with a link to your preferences, the other to "related links". The font is way to small to be useful, but what is far worse, those two
Re:Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
The Related Links box is only shown when the story is shown. When you click "Change", the article disappears, only showing comments. Hence, no box. Is it a waste of real estate? I dunno, maybe. We could consider putting the Related Links box under the story instead of next to it. Or we could get rid of it entirely.
As to caching, yeah, I am not sure wh
Re:Tiny, tiny, tiny letters. (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Module discussions? (Score:1, Interesting)
However, the slashdot model isn't really well suited for long running discussions anyway. Once things fall off the front page, no-one cares.
Re:Module discussions? (Score:1, Interesting)
As to long-running discussions, well, that is sometimes true, but the separate sections helps with that because, like you said, we can have a separate box for each section that is on the side. We can have home page links to anything we want. I think the fact that most Slashdot users do not care about those "old" discussions says more about the use
Re:Module discussions? (Score:1, Interesting)
use Perl; seems like the most obvious place to centralize a lot of these discussions. It's better than subscribing to 5-20 different developer lists for things like Event, LWP, etc. just because you have a passing interest.
Of course, that begs the question, do we need yet another freshmeat? Does the module discussion area simply become "CGI.pm v2.87 released; discuss" type area?
Re:Module discussions? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Module discussions? (Score:1, Interesting)
How many module authors read clp.modules? I sure don't.