Skip to main content
Stack Apps

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

8
  • 1
    Thanks for telling me about the incompatibility with Firefox, will look into that. I don't know why the options box comes off-screen, works for me, so I'll try using your CSS on different resolutions - that may be the problem...? I'll make the text come after the checkbox (I'm not the best in design and user interaction ;p). I'll make it so that the checkboxes fill from the settings. But could you clarify the last bullet please? I don't exactly get what you say - are you saying there should be an option to disable all the features? And I'll see what I can do about the MSE profile change.
    – ᔕᖺᘎᕊ
    Commented Feb 28, 2015 at 18:30
  • I just meant that the code that checks if all the checkboxes are unchecked, and, if so, brings up an alert saying "Please check at least one box!", seems to be completely unnecessary (and mildly annoying when testing).
    – Ilmari Karonen
    Commented Feb 28, 2015 at 18:35
  • Ps. I forked your gist and committed fixes for some of the issues listed above. I don't think I can create a proper pull request for a gist, but you may want to review the changes and merge them yourself, if they look good to you.
    – Ilmari Karonen
    Commented Feb 28, 2015 at 18:50
  • Whoops...! Only just saw your message! I just published the gist and looks like they're the same changes- sorry! Regarding your last edit-isn't that being a bit too pedantic? I think it's unnecessary-I agree it can be a pain in testing, but can be useful when being used normally - or you might just think nothing happened without checking the console, and I don't think you should need to do that. Your CSS works in different resolutions, so I've used that - thanks again for that - and I'm still in the process of checking with Firefox incompatibilities. Please accept my edit for the status-* tags
    – ᔕᖺᘎᕊ
    Commented Feb 28, 2015 at 19:15
  • Sure, accepted. I can live with the alert, but I don't really see why it's necessary; the dialog closing already indicates that something happened, and generally when you click a "Save" button (BTW, shouldn't it say something like "Save settings" instead of "Submit"?), you'd assume it saved the settings. With the new persistent checkboxes, it's also easy enough to verify if you don't trust it.
    – Ilmari Karonen
    Commented Feb 28, 2015 at 19:26
  • You put a good argument forward ;p I guess... you're right... I'll remove the alert and rename the button in the next version (when I've tested on Firefox and also add the needed require) :)
    – ᔕᖺᘎᕊ
    Commented Feb 28, 2015 at 19:28
  • Thanks, no problem. :) Ps. I notice that there's already some overlap (e.g. this) between your script and SOUP, and I think I might want to steal a few more of the less controversial features (with appropriate credit, of course!). ;) That said, I think your script will make an excellent complement to SOUP (which doesn't come with a settings panel to toggle features, and so generally avoids anything controversial). You may have noticed that I've added a link to your script from the SOUP home page. :)
    – Ilmari Karonen
    Commented Feb 28, 2015 at 19:32
  • 1
    Thanks for adding this link to SOUP :) I have no problem with you stealing some things - I think the many difference between SOUP and this is that SOUP generally fixes bugs while this (no acronym unfortunately ;( - AOF?) adds features - so a slight overlap is obviously going to happen (eg. a bug, but not actually a bug = bug+feature-request), but a full on replica is just useless ;p. And I have no problem with you stealing snippets for SOUP :)
    – ᔕᖺᘎᕊ
    Commented Feb 28, 2015 at 20:14