Timwi timwi@gmx.net wrote:
I can't believe people are still bringing forward this argument. No, we don't! We do *not* want to limit our set of alternatives for the benefit of other webmasters. Whoever needs a pure-PHP wiki engine should fork MediaWiki and maintain it themselves when it becomes too un-PHP for their taste. This shouldn't - rather, MUST NOT - be Wikimedia's responsibility, and it MUST NOT adversely affect Wikipedia's performance.
...
Funny, first you clearly state that Wikimedia is not likely to run Windows servers anytime soon, and then you call for maintenance of Windows support. :-)
Then throw in an if($wgUseCExtensions) or something.
Although I contribute to en.wikipedia.org, understand that my primary concern and interest in MediaWiki is as a piece of software I can use on my own websites. I don't use hosting accounts without shell access (and in fact most of my sites are on my own server), but I can sympathize with people who do; I don't use Windows servers, but I can sympathize with those people too.
On the back end, Perl 6 is specced to have one of the most powerful pattern-matching engines ever shipped with a language; it should be able to eat wikicode for breakfast.
Yet Another Not-Really-A-Parser (a.k.a. RegExp HodgePodge)?
grammar MediaWiki::Wikitext { rule start :parsetree { ^ <wikitext> $ } rule wikitext { <literal> [ <command> <literal> ]*: } rule literal { <-[<>[]'{}\n]>*? } rule command { <bold_italic> | <extlink> | <wikilink> | <template> | (\n\h*\n) | . # fallback } ... }
Clearly that isn't complete (or even entirely functional), but you get the idea.