On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Brian<[email protected]> wrote:
> They want the functionality and they are willing to satisfy usability and
> quality of implementation in order to get it, plain and simple.
> ParserFunctions combined with StringFunctions is flat out unreadable. We
> should not facilitate the writing of unreadable code.
>
> As an example, yesterday I wrote some code that basically says, "check the
> doi and http template parameters and check to make sure they begin with
> http, and if not add it." In any reasonable sort of language that lends
> itself to a reasonable sort of implementation. But not with Parser and
> String Functions.
>
> #[[{{{1}}}]].
> {{#if:{{{4}}}|[|{{#if:{{{5}}}|[}}}}{{#if:{{#pos:{{#if:{{{4}}}|{{{4}}}|{{#if:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}}}}}|http|}}|{{#if:{{{4}}}|{{{4}}}|{{#if:{{{5}}}|{{{5}}}}}}}|{{#if:{{{4}}}|
> http://dx.doi.org/{{{4}}}|{{#if:{{{5}}}|http://dx.doi.org/{{{5}}}}}}}}}
> {{#if:{{{2}}}| {{{2}}}}}{{#if:{{{4}}}|]|{{#if:{{{5}}}|]}}}} {{#ifexist:
> File:{{{1}}}.pdf |[{{filepath:{{{1}}}.pdf}} (PDF)]|}} {{#if:{{{3}}}|
> ''{{{3}}}.''}}
>
> There is some extra stuff in there, but you get my point. Just because a few
> people really, really want extra functionality at any cost doesn't mean
> much.
Yes, template code can suck, and that's a fine example. But how is
adding or not adding string functions going to make a significant
difference to that? How is it different that {{#expr:}} or different
from creating {{#if:}} to replace {{qif}}, etc.?
I don't see why the fact that template code is a mess should bear on
the orthogonal question of providing string functionality to the
community. I'm sure that if someone ever does create a better
template coding system then many people will quickly migrate to it,
but why should that need to come first?
-Robert Rohde
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
