Yes, definitely, calculating diffs is costly, and one should carefully
look after that double computing issue : Some parts might be common
between both diff engines.
While this idea looks promising, I'm really curious to see how this
will get implemented : Considering how many issues are related to the
parser, the idea of visual diff, with our current (somewhat
complicated) syntax, seems very challenging.
2008/3/25, Tim Landscheidt <tim(a)tim-landscheidt.de>de>:
Roan Kattouw <roan.kattouw(a)home.nl> wrote:
[...]
The diff information (what was
added/removed/changed and where)
shouldn't be calculated twice, but should somehow be shared between the
two. This will improve performance and increase consistency between the
two diffs. It seemed to me that integrating inlinediff with wikidiff2
would be the most practical way to implement this sharing of information.
I doubt that this is feasible because a visual diff will
have to consider the effect of a change on templates & Co. -
very difficult unless you want to re-implement the whole
parser.
Is there really so much computing time spent on diffs that
performance here is an issue?
Tim
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--
Nicolas Dumazet — NicDumZ
Deuxième année ENSIMAG.