Talk:Describe Chatter

Change History

Wow.

I mis/remember the first 29 October 2007 version did compile. If I remember correctly, then the Winter Ventura observation that the 1 February 2008 change makes the code compile again means someone broke the code by 3 November 2007 and then in all this time between no one managed to notice and complain or help.

I think I remain persuaded that the final consensus over correct textual representation of the numbers will be to match Profile > 2nd Life precedent exactly. We might add commentary in the source code clarifying what that somewhat cryptic English really means.

I know I myself at a glance see no clear sense presented in any version of the code past the original: that's why I haven't yet found any enthusiasm for spending any time compiling the later versions myself.

One of my projects conceived but not carried thru was to compile each version and simply experiment to see what it does, so I could come back here and write down those results to make them clear at a glance, like the newer code isn't.

Would be a community service for anyone to do that, I think.

-- Ppaatt Lynagh 17:01, 1 February 2008 (PST)

Profile > 2nd Life Precedent

Ah. News to newbie me. The LL client already has established precedent here. LL has already provided a poor translation into English at Profile > 2nd Life as a precedent defining what conventional is here. I think we could/ should tweak the script to match that precedent. I'll try that next. -- Ppaatt Lynagh 08:31, 3 November 2007 (PDT)

Date Of Birth

DATA_BORN is the Second Life identifier for this.

I think our old phrase "date-of-birth" is the correct English to represent that source code, not our new coinage "date-of-creation". It is the second birth that we are discussing, I think. -- Ppaatt Lynagh 29 October 2007

I notice alongside the drearily conventional phrase "date-of-birth" we also had the drearily conventional phrase "legal name" representing DATA_NAME, together with "online" and "not online" representing DATA_ONLINE. The history of English phrases we use to represent DATA_PAYINFO I do not yet understand. -- Ppaatt Lynagh 06:09, 2 November 2007 (PDT)

By the discussion above, I have now rolled the article back to the drearily conventional phrase "date-of-birth", as in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOB, away from the new coinage "date-of-creation". Maybe DOB is by now our consensus least-awful design choice here. -- Ppaatt Lynagh 06:09, 2 November 2007 (PDT)

Has No Money

Sounds like we're confused over whether we talk of second money denoted in L$, which any avatar may have, and the real money that comes from a registered credit card, denoted in Euros or US$ or whatever.

I see the history says:

Your account can be credited money without having payment info; payment info can be removed from the account after using it.

This comment explains the new code vs. the old code that was:

// Convert to string from PAYMENT_INFO

string toPayInfoEcho(string data)
{
    integer payInfo = (integer) data;
    if (payInfo == 0)
    {
        return "Has no money";
    }
    else if (payInfo & PAYMENT_INFO_USED)
    {
        return "Has spent money";
    }
    else if (payInfo & PAYMENT_INFO_ON_FILE)
    {
        return "Has money";
    }
    else
    {
        return data;
    }

I don't yet understand this change.

For me, the new code isn't as easy to read at a glance as the old code. I see the sample results have not changed. I suspect that me rerunning the code might produce different sample results. --Ppaatt Lynagh

Payment info indicates the status of your account with regards to you being able to pay tier or buy $Lindens. If you have payment info on file then they have a CC number or Paypal. If they have made a charge to it then they also set the USED flag. Your account can have a positive US$ balance without having payment info on file or used, so saying "Has (no) money" is not a fact, the person may also be broke in real life but have payment info on file. -- Strife Onizuka 13:11, 3 November 2007 (PDT)