There are no false positives at all, since it tests it by actually loading it into Lua.
I think a total disallow is warranted because letting the page be saved with such an error means that the entire module is 100% useless (and will break every page that uses it) until someone fixes it. Jackmcbarn On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 9:53 PM, MZMcBride <[email protected]> wrote: > Jackmcbarn wrote: > >Scribunto has an option to allow code to be saved even if it contains > >syntax errors that prevent it from ever working. The original reason for > >this feature was to make it more convenient to save incomplete code. > >However, in practice, this has never been used for its intended purpose, > >and users who don't know any Lua are breaking otherwise-functional modules > >with it. Because of this, and because it's easy enough to save incomplete > >code by simply wrapping it all in a multiline comment, I plan to remove > >the option unless objections are raised. > > As long as false positives are low, this is probably fine. It'd be nice to > get rid of the checkbox as it's user interface clutter. > > That said, a hard block is still pretty potent... I wonder whether simply > warning the user and auto-categorizing the pages as likely broken on page > save would be adequate. > > MZMcBride > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
