Curse you Mr. Sanderson, curses.

[Andrew the Great]

I'm quoting parts of Miyabi's reply, but I don't know how to show that other than writing it here . Dang, I'm a n00b again.

In order to quote the way I did on this reply you click the "Quote" button in the top right portion of their post.  Then it's just a lot of copy pasting the 'quote' tags.  It's chill.  We were all new once. I'd classify you as a newb though, not a n00b; you're cool.

Or, if you want to feel really special, you can write it as

without the space between the bracket and the slash.

 If you typed what I did above (except with a real close bracket), it would look like this:

  Then type what you want, and at the end, do an

Just so you know. Anyway, welcome to the board. I don't really remember much of Elantris as I last read it about a year ago, so I'll let you people who do remember post.

[Miyabi]

Or, if you want to feel really special, you can write it as

But then you don't have a timestamp or a link, which can be useful if you quote from another thread or quote something from a few pages back if someone wants to see the original discussion on the topic. xD

[Czanos]

Personally I go Miyabi's route, but for the really technical, the syntax is . . .

Code: [Select]

[quote (author={author's name}) (link=(topic={topic number}.msg{message number}#msg{message number}
     date={day part of date in unknown medium?}{Time part of day in unkown medium?}]
At the moment, the inner workings of the

Code: [Select]

date= are beyond me.

[Miyabi]

That's because you are looking at script which someone else wrote and you don't know the definitions of the variables.

[VegasDev]

That's because you are looking at script which someone else wrote and you don't know the definitions of the variables.

Actually, I believe it's epoch.

Edit: This one might work.

[Miyabi]

That's because you are looking at script which someone else wrote and you don't know the definitions of the variables.

Actually, I believe it's epoch.

Edit: This one might work.

Yes, but in any case it was written by someone else and he doesn't know the definition of the variables.

Epoch = a time manager used for programming within a unix based system.

So it is a program and {day part of date in unknown medium?}{Time part of day in unkown medium?} only makes sense if you know the workings of the program.

[VegasDev]

That's because you are looking at script which someone else wrote and you don't know the definitions of the variables.

Actually, I believe it's epoch.

Edit: This one might work.

Yes, but in any case it was written by someone else and he doesn't know the definition of the variables.

Epoch = a time manager used for programming within a unix based system.

So it is a program and {day part of date in unknown medium?}{Time part of day in unkown medium?} only makes sense if you know the workings of the program.

No, it's the number seconds from origination date (epoch) or in this case Jan 1 1970.

Edit: The quickest way to figure it out is to take the number (yours shows 1220582445) divide it by 86400 (number of seconds in a day) take that and divide by 365 (number days in a year) and it gives you a close approximation. This doesn't take into account the extra days (about 9 since there is an extra Feb 29th 97 out of 400 years (Approx every 4 years)) so you can get close.

Edit2: Sorry, I spend too much time conversing with other programmers.

[Miyabi]

That's because you are looking at script which someone else wrote and you don't know the definitions of the variables.

Actually, I believe it's epoch.

Edit: This one might work.

Yes, but in any case it was written by someone else and he doesn't know the definition of the variables.

Epoch = a time manager used for programming within a unix based system.

So it is a program and {day part of date in unknown medium?}{Time part of day in unkown medium?} only makes sense if you know the workings of the program.

No, it's the number seconds from origination date (epoch) or in this case Jan 1 1970.

Edit: The quickest way to figure it out is to take the number (yours shows 1220582445) divide it by 86400 (number of seconds in a day) take that and divide by 365 (number days in a year) and it gives you a close approximation. This doesn't take into account the extra days (about 9 since there is an extra Feb 29th 97 out of 400 years (Approx every 4 years)) so you can get close.

Edit2: Sorry, I spend too much time conversing with other programmers.

I'm not talking about the numbers.  I'm talking about the words in between the {day part of day}  That looks like code to me not a number.

[VegasDev]

Happy Birthday VegasDev

Thanks, how did you know?

I have this strange feeling that an ashmount may erupt somewhere in the northwest tomorrow...

I shouldn't have dug this up, but you were totally right.

[Czanos]

Guys! I think something is omiescently warping reality! The posts on this forum are changing. I know you guys'll think it's not possible, but look for yourself! Stop using your metalminds!

Maybe Coma was on to something . . .

[Miyabi]

Happy Birthday VegasDev

Thanks, how did you know?

I have this strange feeling that an ashmount may erupt somewhere in the northwest tomorrow...

I shouldn't have dug this up, but you were totally right.

Ha ha ha.