On follows list, show indication if chapter creates a gap from previous chapters? :rejected:

[Suzuran]

There's a series I'm following that is updating with new chapters while backfilling missing chapters and I'd like to be able to tell the backfilled chapters from new so I don't accidentally skip ahead.
This may also be useful for people that complain about scanlators who jump directly to the end of a series for whatever reason.

 

[Teasday]

Very unlikely to happen because a) that would require fetching a whole bunch of extra conditional data every time someone loads up their follows just to combat a niche problem, and b) the reader was updated yesterday to display a gap warning upon opening a chapter.

 

[Oeconomist]

@Suzuran—

There's a pre-existing discussion of that idea in another thread.

@Teasday—

I'm very glad that you went to the effort of making that coding change.

But there really doesn't need to be a whole bunch of conditional execution to implement the suggestion of a warning on the Follows page. Each chapter can have a flag variable field that is set or reset when that chapter or sometimes another in the series is uploaded or deleted, with the variable indicating whether there is a gap before the chapter. That variable can be used as the user moves from one chapter to another, as listings are delivered to the Follows page, &c. Most of the computational expense would be incurred only when a chapter were uploaded or deleted.

In the context of the change that you've effected, the priority of that idea is much lower than it was. But it's something to keep in mind for future development.

 

[Teasday]

@Oeconomist You're not wrong, it could be solved with additional data overhead instead of processing overhead. Although rather than adding a flag that's true for <0.1% of our chapters, I think I would prefer to create a separate table for tracking chapters that appear after a gap.

Is it still worth it? Eh... It's worth keeping in mind. We're at an awkward point in the development where I'd rather not complicate these systems so we don't have to rewrite all of it again, although I'm not at all sure how much further the rewrite would be. Not to mention, it seems to me like the reader update essentially solves the actual problem so at the moment I'm personally not too keen on making database changes just for the sake of minor convenience.

 

[Oeconomist]

@Teasday—

You'll get no argument from me on any of that!

Thank you again for your efforts in addressing the problem.

 

[Aoitenshi]

the reader was updated yesterday to display a gap warning upon opening a chapter.

Thanks very much, this is a very helpful addition to the website.

 

[anon763]

@Teasday

the reader was updated yesterday to display a gap warning upon opening a chapter.

It's not showing up for me. Does it not work for the Legacy reader?

 

[Plykiya]

@anon763 Legacy receives little to no updates, since it's a legacy feature.

 

[anon763]

I hoped the implementation would be reader-agnostic, but I figured that would be the case. That's a shame; I never really liked the newer one.