I suggested the edit mostly as a way to let you know that this is possible. I don't mind whether you choose to use these automatic footnotes or the workaround with superscript tags. In deciding whether to reformat older posts, it's worth knowing there are still some bugs with automatic footnotes:

• Footnote numbers not displayed on mobile (seems to affect Safari only, but may cause confusion when there are multiple footnotes below a post)
• Footnotes with the same number in different posts on the same page (affects all browsers and operating systems, for any pages where more than one post uses footnotes)

For the post where I suggested an edit, neither of these should be a problem since there is only 1 footnote. If considering older posts, it's worth checking whether there are multiple footnotes in the post you are editing, or whether other posts on the same page also use footnotes.

@trichoplax: Thanks, those bugs are good to know. In general if you want to know about (say) formatting bugs like this, is there a place on Codidact where they're listed or do you go to GitHub and look for open issues?

Some people may wish to avoid using automatic footnotes until the bugs are fixed. Others may prefer to edit older posts to use automatic footnotes to raise the priority of the bugs. This is just intended to provide the information as background for the discussion.

clemens‭ I searched on Codidact Meta (the overall Meta rather than this community specific Meta, since they are general bugs). I knew about the second bug, and discovered in searching for it that there was also another, so I've listed both. Sometimes bugs are raised on the GitHub repository without first being discussed on Meta, so you can search there too.

If you expect to find something and don't, it can help to use an external search engine instead of Codidact's built in search. Including for example site:meta.codidact.com/posts will narrow down to only results in that community that are posts. Generally I find that external search engines are better when you don't know the exact wording to search for (Codidact's search only finds exact word matches), whereas Codidact's search is better for filtering (you can specify a category, user, or post type if you only want answers).

In Codidact search results, the rough equivalent of filtering GitHub issues to show only open issues would be to filter to exclude the tag "status-completed".