--- Comment #18 from Alex Z. <mrzmanw...@gmail.com> 2011-01-04 17:02:47 UTC ---
(mid-air collision with comment 17)
(In reply to comment #16)
> o Happy template writers
And non-template writers? Will they like it when already-complicated templates
get more complicated?
> o Fast code
For how long? How long will it take for these to be used to their limits? It
looks like it took less than 2 years for the string padding functions to be
abused to this point.
> o buckets of functionality
> o Huge leaps in productivity
> What's not to like?
Is it functionality that we necessarily want in wikitext? I've seen people
saying that they could use this to implement a parser for a simple data storage
format (similar to CSV), and there was some allegation that people wanted to do
natural language processing. While most of the added complexity stays in the
templates themselves, it does eventually filter into articles through the
addition of more parameters.
Has it actually been shown that the current hacks really are slow? They're ugly
hacks, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they're actually slow in real
applications. They're almost certainly comparatively slower than native string
functions, but if the difference is only 50ms, then "faster" wouldn't be a good
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list