On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Greg L <greg_l_at_wikipedia(a)comcast.net> wrote:
This is the product of the buggy math-based parser
functions it must
use. To date, notwithstanding that Jimbo is solidly behind this, and
that Erik supports the production of the required parser function, no
volunteer developer has stepped up to the plate with a parser function
that can character-counting parser function.
Jimmy has absolutely no authority or expertise on technical matters
such as this. His opinion on the best way to implement such
presentational templates is, with respect, not necessarily informed
and not binding in any way, as he does not deal with site operations
or software development at this time.
While Erik may have authority over technical matters (he is Brion's
boss), I would imagine that, like in any organisation, he delegates
final decisions on matters such as this to Brion, who is, after all,
CTO.
The approach we want to take isn't exactly clear at this time -- this
discussion is being had in multiple places, and it basically boils
down to a wide expansion of parser functionality (i.e. inline LUA), or
the greater use of in-built parser functions for the *end* *result*,
rather than for the intermediate steps required. The current approach
of providing "building block" functions has been known to be
reasonably untenable for some time, for performance and usability
reasons (see a few threads up, Domas' rant about Cite).
--
Andrew Garrett