[WikiEN-l] MediaWiki is getting a new programming language

[stevertigo]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Sheldon Rampton<sheldon at prwatch.org> wrote:
> Stevertigo wrote:
>> Hm. That "crap" seems to have worked quite well for a few years now.

> Hardly. The templating system has been a source of complaints and
> frustrations for a very long time.

Well, agreed. But its important to separate complaints about its
nested (and usually whitespace removed) syntax from complaints about
its limited functionality.  If we look at these issues of syntax and
functionality separately, its conceivable that the current "language"
can just be 1) cleaned up a bit, and 2) extended in functionality to a
satisfactory degree.

With regard to 2), the "new language" idea presumes that there are a
large number of serious useful functions that Wikimedians need, that a
language like Lua (the frontrunner) can provide, and that would be too
much of a pain to replicate in amended/extended functions.

With regard to 1), ostensibly just handling the whitespace issue
better would allow for better formatting, and thus better readability.

> The current system of parser functions is actually an improvement over
> what existed previously, because at least it provides for an if-then
> statement and some rudimentary calculations and logical branching.

What other specific functions are needed is thus the real question.

> It was because that system DIDN'T "work quite well" that parser functions were
> developed.

Things work only as well as they do. I'm trying to get more than 25
miles to the gallon from my vehicle (a Ukranian mini-bus shaped like a
taco), but that's what I've got.

> I should mention too that a number of Mediawiki extensions have been
> written over the years -- Semantic Mediawiki, for example -- which are
> also basically attempts to overcome the limitations of Mediawiki
> syntax and the templating system in particular.

Hm. Semantic MW doesn't qualify, AIUI, and I'm not aware of any other
particular extensions to parser functionality.

> I think they understand all too well that it's not a good system, and
> they also understand how difficult it will be to come up with a better
> alternative.

Hm. Interesting.

-Steve