UBB.Developers Forums UBB.threads 7 Development How Do I? Opening user profile to display info.

Hi. I am trying to display info about the user in the forums summary. I am having troubles getting it to open up the profile though.

I am using the following to open the user profile and to get the info:

[code][/code]$numba is the member number. However, when the page loads it tells me "No member profile found for '0000001'. How can I open up this profile and display the info? Thanks.

Have it print the number as well as the profile data you expect - you might find the number is wrong.

Oh, and FYI... this is faster for chompinh:

my @u_profile = &OpenProfile(...);
foreach(@u_profile) { chomp; }

(The foreach sets the default variable, $_, with the line. chomp then operates on $_. As $_ was used, the value in the array is replaced with the changed $_, thereby not needing the extra steps & the counter)

In newer Perl versions you can get away with

chomp @u_profile;

but 5.00404, the UBB.classic minimum version, chokes on that.

Thanks for helping CC. Okay, I had it print the member number and it prints the correct number. I can't get it to print the profile data, because it won't open the profile. Still getting this:

No member profile found for member number: ' 00000130 '

The following code I have added is below sub PageTop in public_forum_summary.pl:

[code][/code]and I am trying to print $blamstat to get the user status to show.

I realize that assigning a bunch of javascript in $numba will probably cause the problem, but I don't know any other way that I could just call the member number through $numba. Any ideas? Thanks!

Uh, that won't work, man... OpenProfile requires the number and only the number.

Around what lines in the code would this be? I can find the resident current member number var pretty quickly.

Yeah I figured that wouldn't work.

I am trying to get it to display in the header on my forum summary. I made a little demo here . The part where it says "Your status is:".

Thanks again.

Mmmm. Can't do that without breaking the cache, you know...

Ah... That's what I was afraid of. Looks like that idea is scrapped. Thanks anyway.