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@tim-landscheidt.de:
Roan Kattouw roan.kattouw@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@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l