Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

448191

Connection re-initialized..

Recommended Posts

I'm very often getting a 'Connection re-initialized' error from FF, especially when trying to submit or modify posts.

Anyone else experiencing  this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No issues here.  How often are you seeing it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote author=ober link=topic=107819.msg432978#msg432978 date=1158089450]
No issues here.  How often are you seeing it?
[/quote]

Quite often. At first I thought it had something to do with the forum being busy, but now I've noticed it only happens when I try to submit codeblocks. And only perticular ones. In a thread in App Design I could post all but one of about 5 methods, no matter how often I try. This is not the first time though.

It happens on 'post', 'save' (as in edit) and 'preview'. I'd show you the code it happens with, but I can't post it (Duh).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Put it on pastebin.com.  We do have an active system here that will stop you from posting certain portions of code.  There is a thread in the FAQ board about it.  I could see it throwing that error if you've tripped that system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guess what: I traced it down to this string: "/...[b].[/b]", exactly four dots (I have the fourth wrapped it 'bold' tags now, so I'm able to post it). Try it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can post those... but it won't let me edit.  Weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FF javascipt debugger tells me this: "[nobbc]document.forms.postmodify[i].name has no properties[/nobbc]".

How that causes re-initialization beats me, but it only shows when the error occurs.

Plus, can someone fix the fact that BBcode is parsed, even when endtags are omitted?

Above should be: document.forms.postmodify[b][\i][/b].name (but without slash).

Edit: hey, that means I found two bugs in one thread...  :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm going to guess the first one is a result of a bug in the AJAX code.

As far as the second... most people probably want it parsed without the end tag because they're lazy.  It's kind of a catch all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote author=ober link=topic=107819.msg433176#msg433176 date=1158110138]
I'm going to guess the first one is a result of a bug in the AJAX code.
[/quote]

I figured that much later.

[quote author=ober link=topic=107819.msg433176#msg433176 date=1158110138]
As far as the second... most people probably want it parsed without the end tag because they're lazy.  It's kind of a catch all.
[/quote]

Bleh.  :-\ That is just 'wrong'. Maybe that would be less of an issue if the 'post submittal' text editor worked better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why is that wrong?  What kind of logic leads you to think that something should not be parsed if you leave off the end tag?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not many people know about this BBCode, but use the nobbc bbcode:
[nobbc][nobbc]bbcode [b]you dont[/b] want to be [i]parsed[/i] here[/nobbc][/nobbc] (note this is wrapped in nobbc tags)

Actuall result:
[nobbc]bbcode [b]you dont[/b] want to be [i]parsed[/i] here[/nobbc]

Anyway why you complaining to us. Its not our problem its down to the SMF team. However I do preferer BBCodes parsers that parse BBCode tags in pairs, rather than parsing single BBCode tags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote author=ober link=topic=107819.msg433377#msg433377 date=1158152537]
Why is that wrong?  What kind of logic leads you to think that something should not be parsed if you leave off the end tag?
[/quote]

Well, I quess I'm looking at it as an 'element node', like in X(HT)ML. Plus, I (the vistor in general) am more likely to forget to include an endtag, resulting in the markup being applied to the rest of my post wich I did not intend, than to deliberately omit the end tag because I intended the markup being applied to the rest of the post (very strange sentence but what can you expect from a Dutch guy).

I think you know what I'm trying to say.

It's not a bug, but maybe it is (or can be made) a configurable option.

[quote author=wildteen88 link=topic=107819.msg433393#msg433393 date=1158153484]
Not many people know about this BBCode, but use the nobbc bbcode:
[nobbc][nobbc]bbcode [b]you dont[/b] want to be [i]parsed[/i] here[/nobbc][/nobbc] (note this is wrapped in nobbc tags)

Actuall result:
[nobbc]bbcode [b]you dont[/b] want to be [i]parsed[/i] here[/nobbc]
[/quote]
Good tip, thanks!

[quote author=wildteen88 link=topic=107819.msg433393#msg433393 date=1158153484]
Anyway why you complaining to us. Its not our problem its down to the SMF team. However I do preferer BBCodes parsers that parse BBCode tags in pairs, rather than parsing single BBCode tags.
[/quote]

Who's complaining? I'm just pointing something out.

Ok, so maybe I was complaining a LITTLE bit  :P

I'm getting that 'people want me to shut up' feeling again. So I will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No one is trying to shut you up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
<quickly hides the duct tape behind his back>

no, no...nobody is trying to shut anybody up...<shifty eyes>  :-X

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote author=steelmanronald06 link=topic=107819.msg433632#msg433632 date=1158170166]
ha ha ha!
[/quote]

Yes.. Very funny CV.... I think I'll sit in a corner and cry now if you don't mind..... :'(






;D ;D ;D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.