2 suggestions for posted articles [modified]
-
Both will be done. #1 is tricky because we don't have an easy way to backdate prior download info. We can do it but with roughly 50Gb of logs per month for 6 years it will take about 3,761 years to process in order to get an accurate count. Or we could just take a wild guess for those articles already up :D #2 is easy.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Chris, is it generally acceptable to link the source & demo ZIP from your own domain if you want to see the number of downloads?
"Nothing ever changes by staying the same." - David Brent (BBC's The Office)
~ ScrollingGrid: A cross-browser freeze-header control for the ASP.NET DataGrid
-
Chris, is it generally acceptable to link the source & demo ZIP from your own domain if you want to see the number of downloads?
"Nothing ever changes by staying the same." - David Brent (BBC's The Office)
~ ScrollingGrid: A cross-browser freeze-header control for the ASP.NET DataGrid
No, because almost 100% of all outside links to downloads that we've had on CodeProject break within 6 months. We require all articles to provide a local download so that no matter what happens a version of the download is always available.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
Great, Chris. Thanks!! BTW, where did you come up with the number 3,761? :)
My Music | My Pics | My Articles BlackDice
-
Dang.. I replied to you in the lounge and it got moved... lost my post :| Oh well summary of it was: #1 has been suggested here before & would definitely be a great feature so you can kind of gauge how useful your code actually is.
"Nothing ever changes by staying the same." - David Brent (BBC's The Office)
~ ScrollingGrid: A cross-browser freeze-header control for the ASP.NET DataGrid
And the reply didn't chase the moving thread? :confused: Hmmmm...Sorry about that.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
Both will be done. #1 is tricky because we don't have an easy way to backdate prior download info. We can do it but with roughly 50Gb of logs per month for 6 years it will take about 3,761 years to process in order to get an accurate count. Or we could just take a wild guess for those articles already up :D #2 is easy.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Of course now we're all dying to know whether there's actually a formula used to generate that number, or if you just scribbled some bogus numbers on a napkin and multiplied...
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.7.1.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
-
Great, Chris. Thanks!! BTW, where did you come up with the number 3,761? :)
My Music | My Pics | My Articles BlackDice
it's called a WAG...
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Both will be done. #1 is tricky because we don't have an easy way to backdate prior download info. We can do it but with roughly 50Gb of logs per month for 6 years it will take about 3,761 years to process in order to get an accurate count. Or we could just take a wild guess for those articles already up :D #2 is easy.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I think both of these would be very useful. #2 especially - I have seen authors improve their articles, and I could not upgrade the vote I gave. For #1, it would be useful even if you started the count from 0 today, for all articles. Maybe at some future time, when you've added more servers, and CP is just too fast, you can run your log-diving batch and get the true count. :)
-
it's called a WAG...
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
WAG...
:confused: The abbreviation WAG, to me, means Wives and Girlfriends. However, it doesn't really fit in this context.
Scottish Developers events: * .NET debugging, tracing and instrumentation by Duncan Edwards Jones and Code Coverage in .NET by Craig Murphy * Developer Day Scotland: are you interested in speaking or attending? My: Website | Blog
-
John Simmons / outlaw programmer wrote:
WAG...
:confused: The abbreviation WAG, to me, means Wives and Girlfriends. However, it doesn't really fit in this context.
Scottish Developers events: * .NET debugging, tracing and instrumentation by Duncan Edwards Jones and Code Coverage in .NET by Craig Murphy * Developer Day Scotland: are you interested in speaking or attending? My: Website | Blog
Wild Ass Guess is my WAG.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Both will be done. #1 is tricky because we don't have an easy way to backdate prior download info. We can do it but with roughly 50Gb of logs per month for 6 years it will take about 3,761 years to process in order to get an accurate count. Or we could just take a wild guess for those articles already up :D #2 is easy.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
It would take only 3.761 hours to parse those logs with Perl ;)
--Mike-- Visual C++ MVP :cool: LINKS~! Ericahist | PimpFish | CP SearchBar v3.0 | C++ Forum FAQ
-
It would take only 3.761 hours to parse those logs with Perl ;)
--Mike-- Visual C++ MVP :cool: LINKS~! Ericahist | PimpFish | CP SearchBar v3.0 | C++ Forum FAQ
And you'd only spend 3.761 years tweaking the script... ;P
---- Scripts i’ve known... CPhog 1.7.1.2 - make CP better. Forum Bookmark 0.2.5 - bookmark forum posts on Pensieve Print forum 0.1.2 - printer-friendly forums Expand all 1.0 - Expand all messages In-place Delete 1.0 - AJAX-style post delete Syntax 0.1 - Syntax highlighting for code blocks in the forums
-
1. that you (at least the person who submitted the article) can see how many times a copy of your stuff has been downloaded. I say this because I know that even I (yes, me) forget to rate an article or leave a comment, even though I download the source code that usually tends to help me a lot. It's great to know I've got a good rating on an article, but it would really make me feel good and want to write the next article if I saw that x amount of people have actually downloaded it. 2. (not sure how the math behind this would go). A way to rate an article again. For instance, I see an article with a nice concept and not enough source code - I rate it a 3. A week later because of comments pertaining to lack of source code, the author updates it with great source code and explanations for all - the rating in my head is now a 4, but I can't change it. Just my 1.39 cents. How does anyone else feel? -- moved by ed. at 17:48 Tuesday 1st August, 2006
My Music | My Pics | My Articles BlackDice
BlackDice wrote:
the rating in my head is now a 4, but I can't change it.
True. As the articles mature into versions, there should be a provision to have the Votes/Ratings should be reset (optionally) for next updates.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage namespace LavanyaDeepak
Personal Weblog
The World of Deepak and Lavanya
Views and Reviews -
BlackDice wrote:
the rating in my head is now a 4, but I can't change it.
True. As the articles mature into versions, there should be a provision to have the Votes/Ratings should be reset (optionally) for next updates.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage namespace LavanyaDeepak
Personal Weblog
The World of Deepak and Lavanya
Views and ReviewsVasudevan Deepak Kumar wrote:
there should be a provision to have the Votes/Ratings should be reset (optionally) for next updates
If we do this then we'll have people sending in trivial updates each time they feel their article is being rated too low.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
Both will be done. #1 is tricky because we don't have an easy way to backdate prior download info. We can do it but with roughly 50Gb of logs per month for 6 years it will take about 3,761 years to process in order to get an accurate count. Or we could just take a wild guess for those articles already up :D #2 is easy.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
