Results: 4Comments by: regecks |
File: PhanxChat10-22-08 |
Hi,
Can we get stricter regexes on...
Posted By: regecks
Hi,
Can we get stricter regexes on URLs.
Saying things like "hey.lol" counts as a URL because there is no checking of tld or anything like that.
I personally wouldn't mind things like "someurl.tld" being missed if it meant false positives being eliminated.
|
File: Outfitter10-20-08 |
Re: Re: Outfitter.cUniqueEquippedGemIDs
Posted By: regecks
Originally posted by mundocani
Thanks for the tip. Any idea if there's a complete list of the affected gems somewhere?
28363
28123
28362
28118
28120
28119
|
File: Outfitter10-17-08 |
Outfitter.cUniqueEquippedGemIDs
Posted By: regecks
Hi there,
'Outfitter.cUniqueEquippedGemIDs' needs to be updated to reflect the changes in the 3.02 PvP gems.
For example, 2912 (Runed Ornate Ruby) is no longer a valid entry.
|
File: bgTrack08-01-08 |
Great idea.
Posted By: regecks
I've been thinking about making this addon myself, good to see you beat me to it ;).
Can you explain the graphical representation of the data on your site? I don't quite understand it.
|