The "New" notification
-
I really like the "New" notification that appears next to new posts, but I think it could be cool to incorporate some client side logic into it. It would be really handy if the "New" went away after a user have clicks on a post. That way it will be easier to see which posts are actually new to the user. Currently it gets really hard to keep track of what you have read, and what you haven't in one of the massive threads that grows very quickly (When there are like 25 different "new" posts). Actually, after thinking about how to implement that feature, it is probably way more work than it is worth. I'm still going to post this, because it is the only thing about these awesome forums that I think could really help make them better.
-
I really like the "New" notification that appears next to new posts, but I think it could be cool to incorporate some client side logic into it. It would be really handy if the "New" went away after a user have clicks on a post. That way it will be easier to see which posts are actually new to the user. Currently it gets really hard to keep track of what you have read, and what you haven't in one of the massive threads that grows very quickly (When there are like 25 different "new" posts). Actually, after thinking about how to implement that feature, it is probably way more work than it is worth. I'm still going to post this, because it is the only thing about these awesome forums that I think could really help make them better.
Ryan Johnston wrote: but I think it could be cool to incorporate some client side logic into it *That* would be fun, not. LOL, I can just imagine the cookie handling code that would manage to do that and how big the cookies would get after awhile (you would have to keep track of every single post read, and I read a lot of posts everyday.) Not too mention the client-side load that would put on the client (scripting languages in general are not very performance orientated.) Of course you could do it on the server-side, but then that means some new tables in the CP database and blam, there goes all the extra scalability Chris has eeked out of the code already. I think most of us would prefer to keep the forums as they are if that means the performance stays as it is. While this feature you mention is cool, it would throw performance out the window and we would all start moaning :) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa
-
Ryan Johnston wrote: but I think it could be cool to incorporate some client side logic into it *That* would be fun, not. LOL, I can just imagine the cookie handling code that would manage to do that and how big the cookies would get after awhile (you would have to keep track of every single post read, and I read a lot of posts everyday.) Not too mention the client-side load that would put on the client (scripting languages in general are not very performance orientated.) Of course you could do it on the server-side, but then that means some new tables in the CP database and blam, there goes all the extra scalability Chris has eeked out of the code already. I think most of us would prefer to keep the forums as they are if that means the performance stays as it is. While this feature you mention is cool, it would throw performance out the window and we would all start moaning :) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa
Paul Watson wrote: I can just imagine the cookie handling code that would manage to do that and how big the cookies would get after awhile (you would have to keep track of every single post read, and I read a lot of posts everyday.) It would be kind of nasty, but keep in mind that you would only have to keep track of the posts that have been read up until the time they would have naturally fallen off the "new" classification (Perhaps expiring cookies would work for this). That is probably less than 200 posts (probably only gets that high durring a flame war) at any given time. What do you think? Ryan Johnston
-
Paul Watson wrote: I can just imagine the cookie handling code that would manage to do that and how big the cookies would get after awhile (you would have to keep track of every single post read, and I read a lot of posts everyday.) It would be kind of nasty, but keep in mind that you would only have to keep track of the posts that have been read up until the time they would have naturally fallen off the "new" classification (Perhaps expiring cookies would work for this). That is probably less than 200 posts (probably only gets that high durring a flame war) at any given time. What do you think? Ryan Johnston
Ryan Johnston wrote: What do you think? That is a good point actually. If anyone is up to finding out what manipulating 200 cookies is like, be my guest :) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa
-
Ryan Johnston wrote: What do you think? That is a good point actually. If anyone is up to finding out what manipulating 200 cookies is like, be my guest :) regards, Paul Watson Bluegrass Cape Town, South Africa
Crap, I thought "suggestions" was a way of making other people do work for me. :) Ryan Johnston