Timeline for Why are there no line numbers in the code listings?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 22, 2020 at 12:26 | comment | added | John | As @DávidHorváth pointed out, any edit can invalidate any answer, creating the same "chaos". So it's hardly an argument against what would be a very handy feature. | |
| Jun 27, 2018 at 4:20 | comment | added | clickbait | +1 Epic answer! Very good point! | |
| May 29, 2016 at 1:29 | comment | added | trichoplax is on Codidact now | +1: I came here to downvote whatever reason was given for not having line numbers, then read it and found it makes perfect sense. | |
| Apr 30, 2016 at 15:07 | comment | added | Dávid Horváth | Any edit can invalidate the existing responses. | |
| Oct 6, 2015 at 21:01 | comment | added | jpmc26 | @Wolf You should reject those edits (or maybe approve and improve in some cases) and rephrase it so that it doesn't depend on line numbers. Don't waste time counting. | |
| Jun 17, 2014 at 16:24 | comment | added | Pacerier | @Karl, The problem you state can be fixed by referential line numbers (aka markers). | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 13:26 | comment | added | MSalters - reinstate Monica | We'd "just" need a tag for linenumbers, so prefixing lines properly renumbers all references. BASIC gained that ability somewhere in the previous century. | |
| Mar 7, 2014 at 8:01 | comment | added | Wolf | Not a good argument, I saw edits where I first had to count to detect that it was invalidating the line number reference. | |
| Jul 4, 2011 at 13:57 | comment | added | sehe | Very. Good. Point. Specialized markers would win the day... | |
| Feb 3, 2011 at 23:04 | history | answered | Karl Bielefeldt | CC BY-SA 2.5 |