OOooo, Pretty!
---> https://m.cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/284324/
... or reduce the size of your browser window and refresh.
... or reduce the size of your browser window and refresh.
...oh. So it’s just the mobile version (much maligned in another thread).
I like it better on my PC than the PC version, interestingly enough.
I like it better on my PC than the PC version, interestingly enough.
My preferred CPlusPlus version is the regular one. The mobile version, while looking nice, is a bit twitchy for me.
I won't malign either version, they both work for others who aren't me. :)
I won't malign either version, they both work for others who aren't me. :)
I prefer the styling of the new version, though I did run into a bug when attempting to log in that require me to login on the old version before switching over. All well.
-Albatross
-Albatross
I've noticed that [small], [sub] and [sup] are not displayed correctly on mobile view.
normal small sub sup
Switch to mobile view and compare --> https://m.cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/284324/#msg1231586
This can lead to misunderstandings and confusion if someone for example write 231 which is displayed as 231 on mobile view.
Hopefully this will get fixed soon but in the meantime it's something to be aware of if you use mobile view.
normal small sub sup
Switch to mobile view and compare --> https://m.cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/284324/#msg1231586
This can lead to misunderstandings and confusion if someone for example write 231 which is displayed as 231 on mobile view.
Hopefully this will get fixed soon but in the meantime it's something to be aware of if you use mobile view.
Last edited on
Hate the mobile site appearance. Never tried it on my actual phone, but ugly on desktop.
Personally I like the classic version on devices other than my phone (which I never even use Cplusplus.com on because who the heck does C++ programming on a phone?)
| Hate the mobile site appearance. |
Really? I'm surprised that your reaction's so strong. There's not much to find offensive IMO.
The only thing I dislike is the choice of styling in the header bar.
For me the combination of a condensed font with all-caps text isn't a good one.
Overall though it's a great improvement.
Last edited on
The problem with [small], [sub] and [sup] seems to be fixed now. That's great!
Unfortunately there is still some problems with the "preview" with things like [code] and [quote] not being displayed the same way as they will be in the forums. To make it worse they have even started to use the same (or at least very similar) faulty preview for the old version.
Another question, how do you create a new topic? In the old version there is a button that says "new topic" at the top but there doesn't seem to be one for the new "mobile" version. I still prefer the old version, the only reason I noticed was because I was going to check if the long standing bug of not being able to use the formatting buttons when creating a new topic had been fixed. If it hasn't then now perhaps is a good time to do so? (for both versions, assuming they plan to keep the old version)
Unfortunately there is still some problems with the "preview" with things like [code] and [quote] not being displayed the same way as they will be in the forums. To make it worse they have even started to use the same (or at least very similar) faulty preview for the old version.
Another question, how do you create a new topic? In the old version there is a button that says "new topic" at the top but there doesn't seem to be one for the new "mobile" version. I still prefer the old version, the only reason I noticed was because I was going to check if the long standing bug of not being able to use the formatting buttons when creating a new topic had been fixed. If it hasn't then now perhaps is a good time to do so? (for both versions, assuming they plan to keep the old version)
Last edited on
If you jump to the mobile view after hitting new topic, you can start a topic, so everything is setup and must have just forgotten to add the button.
Still, the default font just looks straight out of some old timey website meant for people with bad eyesight and need easy to read fonts.
The top bar and side navigation menu all look better, but the rest is just an eyesore.
Still, the default font just looks straight out of some old timey website meant for people with bad eyesight and need easy to read fonts.
The top bar and side navigation menu all look better, but the rest is just an eyesore.
I can't say I have a problem with the font.
Apparently it's called "Roboto".
https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Roboto
Apparently it's called "Roboto".
https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Roboto
and now the shell compiler is not automatically using the code in the 'edit and run' button.