Jump to content
Posted 31 July 2012 - 11:45 PM
Posted 01 August 2012 - 12:06 AM
Posted 01 August 2012 - 12:22 AM
I know, but I think the majority of the community does not know this (particularly the newer fellas) (I actually just use Chrome with it's paste-as-plain-text (crtl-shift-v)). But even if the majority of the community knew this and used it, auto-removing formatting from code would be a nice feature. But that doesn't fix the source tags.
If you switch editing modes out of the WYSWYG (upper left button on the toolbars above the post textbox) it should strip formatting from anything you paste.
Posted 03 August 2012 - 07:24 PM
Posted 22 September 2012 - 03:28 PM
Posted 22 September 2012 - 04:36 PM
Edited by Gaiiden, 22 September 2012 - 04:39 PM.
Posted 22 September 2012 - 05:25 PM
I think the real trouble is that we have both source and code tags. We should really only have one, and work to tweak that one to best suit our needs.
I don't know what it's like on the back end, but for those curios the code tags just use prettify and source tags use SyntaxHighlighter. I'll lay down my thoughts on the two:
Code is the original BBCode formatting that comes with the forum, and Source is an add-in script that we put there ourselves. Either can be disabled just as easily but the question is which one? I'm not technical enough (in regards to which is easiest to modify) nor use them enough to have a full opinion but I'd like to hear others.
I haven't compared tabs in code/source tags, but I know they get mangled in code tags. Just try creating a post using code tags, indent (with four spaces), post it, then edit that post (you may notice the four spaces got converted to tabs) and save it... It's super frustrating whenever I want to edit a post that I've put code in.
Source seems to handle nesting indentation better than Code.
Yeah, IMO that's dumb. I don't know what's involved in fixing that, but that's one of my biggest turn offs for source tags and the primary reason I created this thread. That "feature" completely makes source tags useless, and is the reason I prefer code tags. If that issue got fixed, I might not have such strong feelings against source tags.
And yea, the Source box parses HTML, which has been a problem we've known about for months now and either can't patch it ourselves or haven't convinced the author to fix. That alone turns me off to Source... and is a pretty stupid issue to have in a code box script anyhow IMO