https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=26092
--- 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 argument. -- 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 Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
