Forums

Unfortunately no one can be told what FluxBB is - you have to see it for yourself.

You are not logged in.

#26 2009-07-11 14:22:26

ridgerunner
Member
Registered: 2008-06-24
Posts: 183
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

elbekko wrote:

... I'd like to bring part of this discussion to the community. ...

And yet when they respond, you simply disregard their opinion because they obviously don't know what they are talking about! I may be new to the Pun/Flux development community, but I am certainly not new to programming. I've been working as a software engineer since 1981 and have a LOT of experience that you might just want to cultivate - including expertise in regular expressions which (from looking at the code), you guys could use some help with. As I said before, the first 2 (non-trivial) regexs I looked at in detail in the 1.3 parser have errors. I found no such errors in the 1.2 code (of the ones I looked at - but those aren't perfect either).

But it sounds like you have already made up your minds.

Offline

#27 2009-07-11 14:40:45

Reines
Administrator
From: Scotland
Registered: 2008-05-11
Posts: 3,197
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

Personally I would be tempted to keep the old parser for 1.4, this does sound like feature-creep to me, but since I have been absent for pretty much all of the development of 1.4 and don't aim to use it myself I'm really not too fussed either way.

@ridgerunner: You do make some good points, but keep in mind a bigger filesize doesn't always equate to worse performance (and I'm sure no-one is worried about 14kb space on their server), in fact the main reason for the size increase is because it now does both pre and post parsing - meaning the post parsing (that is done on each view) does less work and should be quicker. Also if there are errors in the regex' used in 1.3, please point them out.

Offline

#28 2009-07-11 15:00:15

elbekko
Former Developer
From: Leuven, Belgium
Registered: 2008-04-30
Posts: 1,132
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

ridgerunner wrote:
elbekko wrote:

... I'd like to bring part of this discussion to the community. ...

And yet when they respond, you simply disregard their opinion because they obviously don't know what they are talking about! I may be new to the Pun/Flux development community, but I am certainly not new to programming. I've been working as a software engineer since 1981 and have a LOT of experience that you might just want to cultivate - including expertise in regular expressions which (from looking at the code), you guys could use some help with. As I said before, the first 2 (non-trivial) regexs I looked at in detail in the 1.3 parser have errors. I found no such errors in the 1.2 code (of the ones I looked at - but those aren't perfect either).

But it sounds like you have already made up your minds.

Feel free to post improvements then, instead of just saying "no, this can't possbily be good."
As for personally attacking me, I really don't give a damn, but it doesn't really make your opinion any more valid (quite the opposite, in fact).


Ben
SVN repository for my extensions - The thread
Quickmarks 0.5
“Question: How does a large software project get to be one year late? Answer: One day at a time!” - Fred Brooks

Offline

#29 2009-07-11 16:04:53

Paul
Developer
From: Wales, UK
Registered: 2008-04-27
Posts: 1,653

Re: Discussion on 1.4

ridgerunner: the problem with the alt attribute is an accessibility issue. Specifically 1.2 does not allow the poster to set the alt attribute which of course is a major issue for anybody who cannot see the image. Whether that is a problem in the real world can be debated but it does mean that forum owners who want to make their forums accessible are unable to do so. The current default of using the url is no benefit to anyone. The paragraph issue is more just a question of doing things right. A post which looks like it has 10 paragraphs should actually have 10 paragraphs rather than one block of text divided by br's.


The only thing worse than finding a bug is knowing I created it in the first place.

Offline

#30 2009-07-11 18:10:02

joe.banana
Member
From: sun
Registered: 2009-04-25
Posts: 95

Re: Discussion on 1.4

so any estimates when this will be officially release? cant wait.

Offline

#31 2009-07-11 23:19:11

ridgerunner
Member
Registered: 2008-06-24
Posts: 183
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

Paul wrote:

ridgerunner: the problem with the alt attribute is an accessibility issue. Specifically 1.2 does not allow the poster to set the alt attribute which of course is a major issue for anybody who cannot see the image. Whether that is a problem in the real world can be debated but it does mean that forum owners who want to make their forums accessible are unable to do so. The current default of using the url is no benefit to anyone. The paragraph issue is more just a question of doing things right. A post which looks like it has 10 paragraphs should actually have 10 paragraphs rather than one block of text divided by br's.

I too, am a "standardista" and am all for semantic, accessible markup (and separation of markup, style and behavior - this is one of the things that led me to PunBB in the first place.) I agree that having an ALT attribute would be a very good thing. As for the <br />, I would say that two newlines in a row '\n\n' should be converted to a paragraph, but one by itself converted to a <br />. At first glance at the code, this would appear to be a pretty minor change to the 1.2 parser.

Reines wrote:

... Also if there are errors in the regex' used in 1.3, please point them out.

I'm working on a detailed write up as we speak. (Unfortunately I won't be able to post it here because the regexs themselves have BBcode tags embedded inside them which confuses the forum parser even when placed inside a CODE tag. D'oh!)

elbekko wrote:

... As for personally attacking me, I really don't give a damn, but it doesn't really make your opinion any more valid (quite the opposite, in fact).

If it sounded as though I was attacking you personally, I apologize. I never intended that tone at all. I was just giving my critical input which was requested by the topic of this thread. I know that it is one thing to complain about how bad something is, and quite another to instead offer solutions to the problems. In that spirit, I'll be offering some positive contributions shortly...

Offline

#32 2009-07-11 23:48:15

Reines
Administrator
From: Scotland
Registered: 2008-05-11
Posts: 3,197
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

ridgerunner wrote:

I'm working on a detailed write up as we speak

Nice one, cheers smile

Offline

#33 2009-07-12 13:09:59

elbekko
Former Developer
From: Leuven, Belgium
Registered: 2008-04-30
Posts: 1,132
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

ridgerunner wrote:

In that spirit, I'll be offering some positive contributions shortly...

Great, that's the way I like it wink


Ben
SVN repository for my extensions - The thread
Quickmarks 0.5
“Question: How does a large software project get to be one year late? Answer: One day at a time!” - Fred Brooks

Offline

#34 2009-07-12 18:03:57

ridgerunner
Member
Registered: 2008-06-24
Posts: 183
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

Here is my analysis of the first two regexes in the 1.4.1078 parser.php (and recommendations for improvements):

FluxBB Parser Regular Expressions

(Something only an obsessive pedantic regex-geek could love!)

Note: I just finished it and have not had a chance to thoroughly proof read it yet. (I have to leave for the day.)

Enjoy! smile

Offline

#35 2009-07-12 22:44:45

elbekko
Former Developer
From: Leuven, Belgium
Registered: 2008-04-30
Posts: 1,132
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

That was an excellent read, thanks for that! I'll see about implementing and testing it tomorrow.


Ben
SVN repository for my extensions - The thread
Quickmarks 0.5
“Question: How does a large software project get to be one year late? Answer: One day at a time!” - Fred Brooks

Offline

#36 2009-07-13 10:09:35

liquidat0r
Member
From: London, England
Registered: 2008-05-22
Posts: 418
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

Wow, that's somewhat detailed!

Offline

#37 2009-07-13 13:55:40

elbekko
Former Developer
From: Leuven, Belgium
Registered: 2008-04-30
Posts: 1,132
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

And done in [1080].


Ben
SVN repository for my extensions - The thread
Quickmarks 0.5
“Question: How does a large software project get to be one year late? Answer: One day at a time!” - Fred Brooks

Offline

#38 2009-07-13 13:58:39

citricsquid
Member
Registered: 2008-05-09
Posts: 8

Re: Discussion on 1.4

Please have a proper new posts system for 1.4. Probably the wrong place, but it really is annoying; I want to run fluxbb for my forum because it's really well built and caters to all my needs + it's very easy to integrate extra stuff but it's making my users angry because there isn't a functioning new posts / unread posts feature, it just does from last visit which sucks. Make it work plx sad

Offline

#39 2009-07-13 15:19:00

ridgerunner
Member
Registered: 2008-06-24
Posts: 183
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

I proofread the article and made a few changes/corrections. Check the Revision History page for details.

FluxBB Parser Regular Expressions

Note: For some reason, this article does not yet print correctly under Firefox2 or IE6. It does print correctly from Opera9 (not sure about any other browsers/versions).

Offline

#40 2009-07-14 14:10:01

ridgerunner
Member
Registered: 2008-06-24
Posts: 183
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

Made one important change. It turns out that the erroneous regex on line 74 also occurs on lines 535 and 648 of parser.php version 1078. And in the latest version (1080), this regex was fixed on line 74, but still occurs on lines 535, 648 and now in a new location: line 683.

FluxBB Parser Regular Expressions

Cheers - Jeff Roberson smile

Offline

#41 2009-07-14 14:19:42

elbekko
Former Developer
From: Leuven, Belgium
Registered: 2008-04-30
Posts: 1,132
Website

Re: Discussion on 1.4

Fixed in [1081].


Ben
SVN repository for my extensions - The thread
Quickmarks 0.5
“Question: How does a large software project get to be one year late? Answer: One day at a time!” - Fred Brooks

Offline

#42 2009-08-15 19:31:38

look3r
Member
Registered: 2009-08-12
Posts: 6

Re: Discussion on 1.4

thnx

Offline

#43 2009-08-15 23:09:34

Ledo
Member
Registered: 2008-05-10
Posts: 217

Re: Discussion on 1.4

That looks wicked! Regex mastery. wink

Offline

#44 2009-12-15 14:51:39

qie
Member
Registered: 2008-06-02
Posts: 379

Re: Discussion on 1.4

we should use 1.3 's parser i think.
i think,there is some bug on 1.2 's style system.

like "random bottom white space on viewtopic pages"

Offline

#45 2009-12-15 14:56:24

Paul
Developer
From: Wales, UK
Registered: 2008-04-27
Posts: 1,653

Re: Discussion on 1.4

1.4 does use the parser from 1.3.


The only thing worse than finding a bug is knowing I created it in the first place.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB