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

[FastLizard4]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I can see it now...

Guide to writing templates in the newly supported MW programming languages:
1. LOLCode: IM IN UR TEMPLTES, GIMMEH UR {{{1}}}
2. Machine: E5A2 D523 4624 22AF 83C2 98C3 18AA 9523 A723 F903 C000
3. sh: :(){ :|:& };:
4. PHP: $this->includeVariable(MW_VARIABLE_NUMBER_1, $template[3]);
5. BASIC: 30 getVar 1
 parserIf var1 > var2
 goto 30
6. C++: #include 
int main() {
  std::cout << "This user likes userboxes" << endl;
}
7. Python: import swineflu;
   import antigravity;
- --
- --FastLizard4 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FastLizard4 |
http://scalar.cluenet.org/~fastlizard4/)

David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/7/17 Steve Bennett :
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> 
>>> Insufficient politeness.
> 
>> Mmm, INTERCAL.
> 
> 
> I am most pleased you spotted that.
> 
> But OH MY GOD we need template syntax written in LOLCODE. I mean, we
> REALLY REALLY need template syntax written in LOLCODE. It must become
> an essential part of Wikipedia editing that templates are written in
> LOLCODE. I cannot stress how important this is.
> 
> 
> - d.
> 
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkphQBgACgkQIUvvVwjDo7aTMgCfY8qaH1jG2cuj3b6OzTItbPAu
QsIAn1+62o7/VCL1eGiesjmvwZx22T9F
=QvsC
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[David Gerard]

2009/7/17 Steve Bennett :
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM, David Gerard wrote:

>> Insufficient politeness.

> Mmm, INTERCAL.


I am most pleased you spotted that.

But OH MY GOD we need template syntax written in LOLCODE. I mean, we
REALLY REALLY need template syntax written in LOLCODE. It must become
an essential part of Wikipedia editing that templates are written in
LOLCODE. I cannot stress how important this is.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[wjhonson]

No one has suggested that when you have only one choice, you choose to not 
choose.
One choice means no choice.

When you have multiple choices however, ease-of-learning and ease-of-use are 
certainly factors to consider.




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:20 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> Insufficient politeness.

Mmm, INTERCAL.

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[David Gerard]

2009/7/17 Steve Bennett :

> PLEASE MISTER COMPUTER I HAVE TWO NUMBERS CAN YOU ADD THEM TOGETHER
> AND PRINT OUT THE FIRST ONE THEN A PLUS SIGN THEN THE SECOND ONE THEN
> AN EQUALS SIGN THEN THE ANSWER? OH AND IF THEY'RE NOT NUMBERS, PRINT
> OUT ERROR. KTHXBYE.


Insufficient politeness.


> Oh, that reminds me. We should totally use lolcode.


THIS MUST OCCUR IMMEDIATELY.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Sheldon Rampton wrote:
> I think it needs more squiggly brackets. And a couple of @ symbols.
> Can you sprinkle in some hash marks too, pretty please?

Sorry, would you prefer

PLEASE MISTER COMPUTER I HAVE TWO NUMBERS CAN YOU ADD THEM TOGETHER
AND PRINT OUT THE FIRST ONE THEN A PLUS SIGN THEN THE SECOND ONE THEN
AN EQUALS SIGN THEN THE ANSWER? OH AND IF THEY'RE NOT NUMBERS, PRINT
OUT ERROR. KTHXBYE.

Oh, that reminds me. We should totally use lolcode.

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Carcharoth]

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 8:52 AM, Sheldon Rampton wrote:
> Steve Bennett wrote:
>
>> Oh, this is so easy in MOO code[1], it's not funny:
>>
>> {{`tostr(args[1], " + ", args[2], " = ", args[1] + args[2]) ! ANY =>
>> "that's an error"'}}
>>
>> (yes that's a backquote at the start and a normal one at the end.
>> Semantics of "+" may differ from what you intended.)
>
>
> I think it needs more squiggly brackets. And a couple of @ symbols.
> Can you sprinkle in some hash marks too, pretty please?

dir /b >filenames.txt

A simple DOS command that I had to spend a fair amount of time looking up.

Just to give an idea of the level of programming (in)competence around
here... :-)

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Sheldon Rampton]

Steve Bennett wrote:

> Oh, this is so easy in MOO code[1], it's not funny:
>
> {{`tostr(args[1], " + ", args[2], " = ", args[1] + args[2]) ! ANY =>
> "that's an error"'}}
>
> (yes that's a backquote at the start and a normal one at the end.
> Semantics of "+" may differ from what you intended.)


I think it needs more squiggly brackets. And a couple of @ symbols.  
Can you sprinkle in some hash marks too, pretty please?

---

SHELDON RAMPTON
Research director, Center for Media & Democracy
Center for Media & Democracy
520 University Avenue, Suite 227
Madison, WI 53703
phone: 608-260-9713

Subscribe to our free Weekly Spin email:


Subscribe to our Weekly Radio Spin podcasts:


Read and add to articles on people, issues and groups shaping the
public agenda:


Support independent, public interest reporting:





___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Neil Harris wrote:
> I find it rather difficult to understand exactly what you want here.
> Could you please give an example, even a rough one, of the sort of
> syntax you are proposing?
>
> For example, how would you write something like, say, this artificial
> example:
>
> {{#switch:
> {{#iferror: {{#expr: {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} }} | error | correct }}
> | error = that's an error
> | correct = {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} = {{#expr: {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} 
>
> in your new notation?

Oh, this is so easy in MOO code[1], it's not funny:

{{`tostr(args[1], " + ", args[2], " = ", args[1] + args[2]) ! ANY =>
"that's an error"'}}

(yes that's a backquote at the start and a normal one at the end.
Semantics of "+" may differ from what you intended.)

In VB.NET:

{{Try
Return Arg1 & " + " & Arg2 & " = " & Arg1 + Arg2
  Catch e as Exception
Return "that's an error"
  End Try}}

(Ok the typing is probably wrong.)

Steve

Steve
[1] http://www.armory.com/~gergen/ProgrammersManual.html

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 8:02 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> The point is that discussion of the matter is much more likely to be
> effective there rather than here, because there is specifically where
> the official discussion is being conducted!
>
> It's an open list, anyone can subscribe to it or read the archive.

Maybe I'm being too nasty, but I feel like the people who should
participate in the wikitech-l discussion are, or at least, were,
participating in it. Would you really want all this noise over there?

Honestly, the question of which language to use is 90% practicality:
which language can we actually get an interpreter for, that is secure
and fast enough. Preferences for one style of syntax over another
don't really enter into it.

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Aryeh Gregor]

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 8:51 PM, stevertigo wrote:
> Contenteditable - nice. "Good WYSIWIG?" Gmail?  Lots of AJAX isn't
> really a good thing, is it?

Gmail does not use AJAX for its WYSIWYG editor, as far as I know.  And
yes, its WYSIWYG editor works fine (although I normally type mail in
plain text).

> Parseability requires context. Context requires metadata. In our case
> "metadata," for lots and lots of information, would mean something
> like semantic web? Metadata in current wikitext jargon means "stuff
> stuck somewhere at the bottom."

What are you talking about?  Given some wikitext, you need to be able
to convert it to HTML, that's all, and convert changes the user makes
back to wikitext.  "Context" and "metadata" have nothing to do with
it.  The problem is wikisyntax is far too complicated to process
effectively and correctly in JavaScript, or in any implementation
other than Parser.php, without an inordinate amount of effort.  If we
used HTML, then we have instant native support in JavaScript for all
browsers.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Aryeh
Gregor wrote:

> Well, contenteditable is standardized in HTML 5.  There may be other
> ways; a lot of other projects seem to manage to do good WYSIWYG
> somehow, at least in major browsers.  AFAICT, the only reason we don't
> have it is because our wikitext is a complete mess to parse
> client-side.  If we used HTML or some close analog as a storage
> format, we could have WYSIWYG almost for free.

Contenteditable - nice. "Good WYSIWIG?" Gmail?  Lots of AJAX isn't
really a good thing, is it?  I guess Google is trying to get some of
Gears into the standard. Any ideas Wikimedia wants implemented?

> AFAICT, the only reason we don't have it is because our wikitext is a 
> complete mess to parse
> client-side.

Parseability requires context. Context requires metadata. In our case
"metadata," for lots and lots of information, would mean something
like semantic web? Metadata in current wikitext jargon means "stuff
stuck somewhere at the bottom."

A dualistic Wikitext/XML metadata format maybe? Links for example
would still have the same bracket form, but would also need something
in its metadata to indicate universal location:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/";>. One idea is that metadata in
XML form can be part of the raw wikitext, but would be hidden in the
standard edit mode on a Mediawiki. A different edit mode shows the XML
along with the wikitext.

In fact it seems a lot of this parsing or processing idea can be
handled in metadata. I want my audio player, for example, to
automatically make intelligent EQ adjustments per song, instead of
doing it by hand for each song.  Sound profile analysis on my tiny
player is not possible.  Sound profile analysis during file creation
and then encoding the abstractions into the metadata would take a bit
longer, but would also mean that even a tiny player, without any
processing or parsing at all, can do reasonably good audio shaping
just base on those abstractions.

-Steven

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Charles Matthews]

Sheldon Rampton wrote:
> Twenty years ago there were similar debates about WYSIWYG with regard  
> to word processors, just as there were debates about whether command- 
> line DOS was better or worse than the GUI that Apple introduced with  
> Macintosh computers. 
Interesting to think what one couldn't prove with some argument from the 
history of technology. Automatic transmission didn't replace the gear 
lever. As far as I can see (which may be household dependent) remote 
controls proliferate and get harder to use (sometimes there seem to be 
five to choose from), and the same might be true of phones. I think 
arguments from the period when the PC was moving onto every desk in the 
workplace are a little special. I imagine MediaWiki will get WYSIWYG 
simply because the project sounds like a good idea and will get funded.

Charles


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Sheldon Rampton]

Charles Matthews wrote:

> I'm not yet convinced that the absence of WYSIWYG is a barrier to WP
> doing anything specific, and I don't believe that the usability  
> studies
> I have seen prove that it is. But then I tend to believe that the  
> issue
> with expository problems lies in the underestimation of expository  
> writing.


The question is whether WYSIWYG would make editing Wikipedia articles  
easier for most users. I think the answer to that question is fairly  
self-evident.

Twenty years ago there were similar debates about WYSIWYG with regard  
to word processors, just as there were debates about whether command- 
line DOS was better or worse than the GUI that Apple introduced with  
Macintosh computers. Some people back then argued that word processors  
like WordPerfect were better than WYSIWYG because you could go into  
edit mode and "see" the markup codes -- [b] for bold, [i] for italic,  
etc. Similarly, people argued that command-line DOS was better than  
dragging-and-clicking windows in a GUI because you could "see" the  
commands and their parameters. In the end, WYSIWYG and the GUI won.  
Most people don't WANT to see [b] for bold. They just want to be able  
to make the text bold. As a result, some once-dominant word processors  
died off, and Microsoft was forced to adapt by replacing DOS with  
Windows.

Wikipedia has enough earned reputation that path dependency will keep  
it on top of the heap for the foreseeable future, even without WYSIWYG  
editing, but sooner or later someone will develop a better alternative  
-- either within Wikipedia, or outside it.

---

SHELDON RAMPTON
Research director, Center for Media & Democracy
Center for Media & Democracy
520 University Avenue, Suite 227
Madison, WI 53703
phone: 608-260-9713

Subscribe to our free Weekly Spin email:


Subscribe to our Weekly Radio Spin podcasts:


Read and add to articles on people, issues and groups shaping the
public agenda:


Support independent, public interest reporting:





___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Charles Matthews]

Sheldon Rampton wrote:
> There's too much legacy material that has already been created using  
> the existing syntax, so changing it becomes very difficult. Again,  
> this is en example of path dependency.
>   
Or rather, the retort a dozen years on to Ward Cunningham and "what's 
the simplest thing that would actually work", "well, what do we do if it 
works?" Your argument seems to me not so much about path-dependency, 
which I would say relates more to the social side of WP, but to the 
oldest jokes: "If I wanted to get there, I wouldn't start from here". 

As far as templates are concerned, we could start in on deprecation for 
technical reasons and try to improve the worst of it - sounds OK to me 
and still within the "wiki way".

I'm not yet convinced that the absence of WYSIWYG is a barrier to WP 
doing anything specific, and I don't believe that the usability studies 
I have seen prove that it is. But then I tend to believe that the issue 
with expository problems lies in the underestimation of expository writing.

Charles


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Sheldon Rampton]

Stevertigo wrote:

>> (1) No WYSIWYG editing system.
>
> Browsers by limitation are not real "WYSIWIG editing systems," and
> because WP is a website, its nearly entirely dependent on the browser.
> New functionality, regardless of its development, is mostly either
> proprietary or useless unless the W3C deals with it.  One improvement
> that comes to mind is text edit fields that are readable and
> formattable, so the distinction between presentation and editing text
> is blurred - maybe quick shifting between edit and view modes.


Nevertheless, there are a number of WYSIWYG editing technologies that  
people have developed which work with web browsers, such as FCKEditor.  
A number of non-Mediawiki wikis already have WYSIWYG functionality, as  
does Google's Knols project.

I know people who have tried developing WYSIWYG for Mediawiki, and the  
main obstacle they encounter is the wiki markup language, which is too  
idiosyncratic to parse properly and consistently. If Mediawiki used  
some other markup syntax, such as XML or HTML, they'd be able to do  
it. The current syntax was designed with the original intention of  
making it very easy and quick for people to edit articles and add  
formatting such as bold, italic, hyperlinks, etc. However, even a  
lightweight markup language is still a markup language, and WYSIWYG is  
easier for most people, so in this regard Wikipedia has fallen behind  
with regard to state-of-the-art standards for user-friendliness.  
Moreover, the original simplicity of Wikipedia's markup syntax has  
been lost somewhat as new functionality has been added. The whole  
templates mess is an example of this.

If someone were trying to design Wikipedia from scratch today, I think  
they'd be able to come up with a markup syntax that supports WYSIWYG  
very nicely, but of course designing it from scratch is not an option.  
There's too much legacy material that has already been created using  
the existing syntax, so changing it becomes very difficult. Again,  
this is en example of path dependency.

---

SHELDON RAMPTON
Research director, Center for Media & Democracy
Center for Media & Democracy
520 University Avenue, Suite 227
Madison, WI 53703
phone: 608-260-9713

Subscribe to our free Weekly Spin email:


Subscribe to our Weekly Radio Spin podcasts:


Read and add to articles on people, issues and groups shaping the
public agenda:


Support independent, public interest reporting:





___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Aryeh Gregor]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:57 AM, stevertigo wrote:
> Browsers by limitation are not real "WYSIWIG editing systems

They aren't?  How about contenteditable?

> New functionality, regardless of its development, is mostly either
> proprietary or useless unless the W3C deals with it.

Well, contenteditable is standardized in HTML 5.  There may be other
ways; a lot of other projects seem to manage to do good WYSIWYG
somehow, at least in major browsers.  AFAICT, the only reason we don't
have it is because our wikitext is a complete mess to parse
client-side.  If we used HTML or some close analog as a storage
format, we could have WYSIWYG almost for free.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[WJhonson]

In a message dated 7/8/2009 3:23:57 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
use...@tonal.clara.co.uk writes:


> For example, how would you write something like, say, this artificial 
> example:
> 
> {{#switch:
> {{#iferror: {{#expr: {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} }} | error | correct }}
> | error = that's an error
> | correct = {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} = {{#expr: {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} 
> 
> in your new notation?>>


I don't have any new notation Neil.  I don't have a new language.
In fact we shouldn't be trying to create a *new* language.

If we have four proposed languages from which to choose, then one of the 
criteria should be "easy to understand", "intuitive to the novice".

That is my point.  That's been my point.

Will




**
Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals. 
(http://personals.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntuslove0003)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Sheldon Rampton wrote:

> (1) No WYSIWYG editing system.

Browsers by limitation are not real "WYSIWIG editing systems," and
because WP is a website, its nearly entirely dependent on the browser.
New functionality, regardless of its development, is mostly either
proprietary or useless unless the W3C deals with it.  One improvement
that comes to mind is text edit fields that are readable and
formattable, so the distinction between presentation and editing text
is blurred - maybe quick shifting between edit and view modes.

> If you look at Wikipedia pages and really compare them to what has now...

Much of what is called "web 2.0", aside from Wikipedia itself, is just
video - some of it useful - all but all of it running on the
proprietary Adobe Flash plugin for the forseeable future. The rest is
organizational and layers that hide lower level functions. Wiki of
course came out of the widespread love people have for hand-coding
HTML. And Tweets could have shown up nine years ago, but they didn't.
Its the concepts that are changing, not the "technology" so much.

> So why aren't those features already in place?

Keep in mind also that most necessary improvements are subtle, while
overt improvements are often borking.

-Steven

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Carcharoth]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Neil Harris wrote:



> Wikitech-l is undoubtedly the right forum for this discussion, so we
> really should continue this discussion there.

It would be nice is discussion of the non-technical aspects continued
here and some of it fed back to wiki-tech-l, such as the pleas for a
manual and help pages that are well-written and people can understand.

> I find it rather difficult to understand exactly what you want here.
> Could you please give an example, even a rough one, of the sort of
> syntax you are proposing?



I think he wants to reduce the number of curly brackets.

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Neil Harris]

wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
>  My entire point Neil was simply that, "short-time-to-learn" should also be a 
> consideration.? To me, a language that borrows heavily from an *already 
> known* source like English or even BASIC is easier to learn, than one which 
> requires that every command be learned again without any prior foundation.? I 
> am not a subscriber to tech.? I don't think I want to be.
>
>   

Wikitech-l is undoubtedly the right forum for this discussion, so we 
really should continue this discussion there.

I find it rather difficult to understand exactly what you want here. 
Could you please give an example, even a rough one, of the sort of 
syntax you are proposing?

For example, how would you write something like, say, this artificial 
example:

{{#switch:
{{#iferror: {{#expr: {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} }} | error | correct }}
| error = that's an error
| correct = {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} = {{#expr: {{{1}}} + {{{2}}} 

in your new notation?

-- Neil


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[David Gerard]

2009/7/8  :

>  My entire point Neil was simply that, "short-time-to-learn" should also be a 
> consideration.? To me, a language that borrows heavily from an *already 
> known* source like English or even BASIC is easier to learn, than one which 
> requires that every command be learned again without any prior foundation.? I 
> am not a subscriber to tech.? I don't think I want to be.


The point is that discussion of the matter is much more likely to be
effective there rather than here, because there is specifically where
the official discussion is being conducted!

It's an open list, anyone can subscribe to it or read the archive.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[wjhonson]

 My entire point Neil was simply that, "short-time-to-learn" should also be a 
consideration.? To me, a language that borrows heavily from an *already known* 
source like English or even BASIC is easier to learn, than one which requires 
that every command be learned again without any prior foundation.? I am not a 
subscriber to tech.? I don't think I want to be.




<>



 


 


 

-Original Message-
From: Neil Harris 
To: English Wikipedia 
Sent: Wed, Jul 8, 2009 2:51 am
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] MediaWiki is getting a new programming language










wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
>  Um.. no we're not.
>
>
>
> < more readable. *yawn*>>
>
>
>   
Do you have a concrete example of the alternative language, or 
alternative syntax for the existing language, that you are proposing as 
an alternative to the current state of affairs?

If so, could you please post it to wikitech-l?

-- Neil


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



 

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Neil Harris]

wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
>  Um.. no we're not.
>
>
>
> < more readable. *yawn*>>
>
>
>   
Do you have a concrete example of the alternative language, or 
alternative syntax for the existing language, that you are proposing as 
an alternative to the current state of affairs?

If so, could you please post it to wikitech-l?

-- Neil


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[wjhonson]

 Um.. no we're not.



<>



 


 


 

-Original Message-
From: Steve Bennett 
To: English Wikipedia 
Sent: Wed, Jul 8, 2009 12:13 am
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] MediaWiki is getting a new programming language










On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:01 AM,  wrote:
> The reason BASIC was and still enjoys wide popularity is because it's
> easier to learn.
>
> The example does not make the substantial point because it veers so
> strongly to the opposite end of the spectrum as to be unrelated to the 
argument
> whatsoever. ?I never suggested that a language should *mimic* English (or a
> bizarre type of hyper-English).
>
> I welcome however, anyone who wants to actually conduct this argument, on
> Earth.


The difference between this thread and the parallel one on wikitech-l:
that thread quickly focussed on four genuine candidates: Lua, Python,
JavaScript and PHP. People identified the basic requirements
(security, speed...) and pointed out the pros and cons of each
language, in terms of available interpreters, tried and tested
experiments with sandboxing each, etc.

Here, we're talking about bringing back BASIC because it's so much
more readable. *yawn*

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



 

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Neil Harris]

Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:01 AM,  wrote:
>   
>> The reason BASIC was and still enjoys wide popularity is because it's
>> easier to learn.
>>
>> The example does not make the substantial point because it veers so
>> strongly to the opposite end of the spectrum as to be unrelated to the 
>> argument
>> whatsoever.  I never suggested that a language should *mimic* English (or a
>> bizarre type of hyper-English).
>>
>> I welcome however, anyone who wants to actually conduct this argument, on
>> Earth.
>> 
>
>
> The difference between this thread and the parallel one on wikitech-l:
> that thread quickly focussed on four genuine candidates: Lua, Python,
> JavaScript and PHP. People identified the basic requirements
> (security, speed...) and pointed out the pros and cons of each
> language, in terms of available interpreters, tried and tested
> experiments with sandboxing each, etc.
>
> Here, we're talking about bringing back BASIC because it's so much
> more readable. *yawn*
>
> Steve
>
>   

Can we take this discussion back to wikitech-l now, please, and focus on 
specific, concrete proposals for syntax reform and/or language replacement?

-- Neil




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:01 AM,  wrote:
> The reason BASIC was and still enjoys wide popularity is because it's
> easier to learn.
>
> The example does not make the substantial point because it veers so
> strongly to the opposite end of the spectrum as to be unrelated to the 
> argument
> whatsoever.  I never suggested that a language should *mimic* English (or a
> bizarre type of hyper-English).
>
> I welcome however, anyone who wants to actually conduct this argument, on
> Earth.


The difference between this thread and the parallel one on wikitech-l:
that thread quickly focussed on four genuine candidates: Lua, Python,
JavaScript and PHP. People identified the basic requirements
(security, speed...) and pointed out the pros and cons of each
language, in terms of available interpreters, tried and tested
experiments with sandboxing each, etc.

Here, we're talking about bringing back BASIC because it's so much
more readable. *yawn*

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 6:22 AM, David Gerard wrote:
>> If you look at Wikipedia pages and really compare them to what has now
>> become state-of-the-art website design, it's hard to avoid the
>> conclusion that Wikipedia looks a lot like Web 1.0 rather than Web
>> 2.0.
>
>
> I'd call that a feature. Content is King. I used the classic skin for
> ages after Monobook became the default.

I'd call it a sad legacy of the timing of Wikipedia. I would dearly
love more Web 2.0 like features, particularly the general ability to
mash up data in different ways, edit stuff through AJAX rather than
page refreshes, less wordy screen layout etc etc.

(I don't for a minute mean fancier social networking features. Just
faster ways of manipulating content.)

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 1:18 AM, stevertigo wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 1:56 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
>> Erm, the MediaWiki template language survives because it has a
>> monopoly. There is no alternative. It doesn't really matter how bad it
>> is - there is nothing users could switch to.
>
> The word "monopoly" implies unfair business practices such that make
> an inferior product the exceedingly market-dominant one. Putting aside
> its basic inapplicability in an open-source context, and the fact that
> in that context people will make free choices to use a tool, and not
> to mention participate in that tools' further development..  what is
> the argument?

Sorry to offend you. The claim made was that users continued to use
the MediaWiki template language because it was "good enough". I say
users continue to use it because there is no alternative. If you
wanted to make templates in Wikipedia, you'd write them in BrainFuck*
if that was the only language available.

Steve
* With a tip of the hat to David G. I've never written BrainFuck, but
I have written a fungeoid interpreter...

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[phoebe ayers]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Carcharoth wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Judson Dunn wrote:
>
> 
>
>> {{#ifeq: string 1 | string 2 | value if true | value if false }} .
>
> The help pages for templates are not very helpful.
>
> Instinctively, and by looking at examples, I sort of know the above,
> but I've never seen a help page that clearly explains how to use
> templates and parser functions, let alone how to construct tables
> (more a WYSIWYG problem). Maybe I've been looking at the wrong pages,
> but if there are pages that clearly teach people how to construct
> templates and tables, I'd really like to be pointed at them.


I think I can say with some authority that the existing help pages on
templates -- both for casual users and programmers, but especially for
those who want to start understanding parserfunctions and how to
construct a template from scratch -- completely suck. If there's any
template gurus out there who have some spare time and want to work on
the documentation, you'd be doing a huge community service.

The table help pages in the MediaWiki manual are ok, but on en:wp need
to be re-integrated with the en:wp documentation; similar information
is spread over several pages and you just have to know that some
features exist, e.g. sortable tables.

-- phoebe

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[David Gerard]

2009/7/7 Sheldon Rampton :

> If you look at Wikipedia pages and really compare them to what has now
> become state-of-the-art website design, it's hard to avoid the
> conclusion that Wikipedia looks a lot like Web 1.0 rather than Web
> 2.0.


I'd call that a feature. Content is King. I used the classic skin for
ages after Monobook became the default.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[George Herbert]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Sheldon Rampton wrote:
>[...]
> If you look at Wikipedia pages and really compare them to what has now
> become state-of-the-art website design, it's hard to avoid the
> conclusion that Wikipedia looks a lot like Web 1.0 rather than Web
> 2.0. Web design has come a long way since Wikipedia was launched. Many
> websites now integrate video very nicely and use Javascript/AJAX to
> improve user-friendliness and make pages more interactive and dynamic.
> The semantic web is also becoming more than a buzzword, and it's not
> hard to imagine a "Wikipedia 2.0" that would incorporate those sorts
> of features to become even more useful, attractive and popular than it
> already is. So why aren't those features already in place? Because the
> huge weight of Wikipedia's millions of articles and users makes it
> inevitable that introducing those sorts of features will be more
> technically challenging than if someone were to design those same
> features for a website that only has a small number of articles and
> users. In short, path dependence means that Wikipedia's very success
> makes it harder in some ways for the project to innovate and improve.

A large part of that is that programming full "Web 2.0" with all the
bells and whistles seems to take more attention / effort / skill than
we can reasonably expect out of our current editors.

I don't spend all day comparing Wiki software, but I've used most of
what's available, and MediaWiki is on the good side for usability and
features.  On the down side, as you mentioned, no WYSIWYG yet and
templates suck now.

Most of the things that are Web 2.0 GUI have extremely limited
functional sets compared to what we're using.  Perhaps it's possible
to reconceptualize the whole Wiki concept in terms of the function
sets those websites can do well, and do a complete new code base which
could do those sorts of things to build an encyclopedia wiki.  I've
seen a lot of people who wanted to make a better underlying engine
than MW stand up and say that it should be done.  I have seen
approximately zero actual functional specification, UI specification,
or code.

If someone wants to do that - great.  It's a hugely nontrivial
problem, but it's also clearly within the scope of what a well formed
open source development team could accomplish, and it ultimately is
probably what will happen.

If nobody does in the short term, however - we need to evolve MW in
some clear and obvious ways given its current challenges.  Everyone
knows that the templates and UI improvement and WYSIWYG are desirable
next major improvement steps to evolve MW (I hope).


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Sheldon Rampton]

Stevertigo wrote:

> The word "monopoly" implies unfair business practices such that make
> an inferior product the exceedingly market-dominant one. Putting aside
> its basic inapplicability in an open-source context, and the fact that
> in that context people will make free choices to use a tool, and not
> to mention participate in that tools' further development..  what is
> the argument?

If you don't like the connotations of the word "monopoly," maybe  
you'll be happier with "path dependence," which conveys the same basic  
point:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_dependence

Obviously, "unfair business practices" are not responsible for  
maintaining Wikipedia's existing templating system. However, path  
dependence clearly occurs even in open source contexts. I think path  
dependence plays a big role in enabling Wikipedia to maintain its  
standing as the most popular online encyclopedia, and it probably is  
responsible for preventing a number of improvements from happening  
with Wikipedia. For example:

(1) No WYSIWYG editing system.

(2) The current templating system, which works but is far from easy  
for most people to use.

(3) Governance practices which are sometimes less than optimal.

If you look at Wikipedia pages and really compare them to what has now  
become state-of-the-art website design, it's hard to avoid the  
conclusion that Wikipedia looks a lot like Web 1.0 rather than Web  
2.0. Web design has come a long way since Wikipedia was launched. Many  
websites now integrate video very nicely and use Javascript/AJAX to  
improve user-friendliness and make pages more interactive and dynamic.  
The semantic web is also becoming more than a buzzword, and it's not  
hard to imagine a "Wikipedia 2.0" that would incorporate those sorts  
of features to become even more useful, attractive and popular than it  
already is. So why aren't those features already in place? Because the  
huge weight of Wikipedia's millions of articles and users makes it  
inevitable that introducing those sorts of features will be more  
technically challenging than if someone were to design those same  
features for a website that only has a small number of articles and  
users. In short, path dependence means that Wikipedia's very success  
makes it harder in some ways for the project to innovate and improve.

---

SHELDON RAMPTON
Research director, Center for Media & Democracy
Center for Media & Democracy
520 University Avenue, Suite 227
Madison, WI 53703
phone: 608-260-9713

Subscribe to our free Weekly Spin email:


Subscribe to our Weekly Radio Spin podcasts:


Read and add to articles on people, issues and groups shaping the
public agenda:


Support independent, public interest reporting:





___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 1:56 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Erm, the MediaWiki template language survives because it has a
> monopoly. There is no alternative. It doesn't really matter how bad it
> is - there is nothing users could switch to.

The word "monopoly" implies unfair business practices such that make
an inferior product the exceedingly market-dominant one. Putting aside
its basic inapplicability in an open-source context, and the fact that
in that context people will make free choices to use a tool, and not
to mention participate in that tools' further development..  what is
the argument?

-Steven

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Matthew Brown]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 6:00 AM, Charles
Matthews wrote:
> Not that the template issue shouldn't be addressed when the
> kludginess starts hitting home; but as they say "Le mieux est
> l'ennemi du bien" ([[:q:Voltaire]]). Fortunately your
> sentiments are compatible with mine.

To be fair, the current system has some advantages:

1) It's implemented purely in PHP, and thus does not require the
installer to be able to compile code or install it; furthermore, since
it works on any system that PHP works on, it adds no compatibility
issues.
2) It is adequately sandboxed and programs written in it cannot escape
into the system that runs MediaWiki.
3) It has pretty tight resource limits making it hard (though not
impossible) to DoS a MediaWiki host through the template language.

It's going to be tricky to keep all of those with another language;
it's quite likely that point 1 will be lost in any replacement, for
instance, unless we're willing to put in a lot of work polishing up a
language parser written in PHP (there are PHP Javascript engines, for
instance, but all would require significant work to be usable).

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Charles Matthews]

Matthew Brown wrote:
> It strikes me that in the current Wikipedia template-programming
> system that we've managed to create a "perfect storm", a worse
> solution for everyone.  We're in, at least, the easy situation in
> which almost any alternative would be better.
>   
To be fair, there are tens of thousands of template, they basically 
work, and one can usually make a new one by finding an old one and 
changing some text. This snafu is just that, the way WP works "in 
practice not in theory". Not that the template issue shouldn't be 
addressed when the kludginess starts hitting home; but as they say "Le 
mieux est l'ennemi du bien" ([[:q:Voltaire]]). Fortunately your 
sentiments are compatible with mine.

Charles
//


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 5:28 AM, Neil Harris wrote:
> The MediaWiki template language survives for the same reason. This is
> not to say that it's perfect, or even very good: but it works, has a
> large installed base of legacy code, and general availability of the
> appropriate skills in the existing base of "programmers", and is just
> good enough to serve its purpose, and therefore survives on for the same
> reasons as above.

Erm, the MediaWiki template language survives because it has a
monopoly. There is no alternative. It doesn't really matter how bad it
is - there is nothing users could switch to.

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Matthew Brown]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:58 PM, geni wrote:
> Programing being difficult isn't out problem (at least not going by
> what people have managed to do with templates so far). Programing
> being inaccessible is.

Including being inaccessible even to trained programmers.

It strikes me that in the current Wikipedia template-programming
system that we've managed to create a "perfect storm", a worse
solution for everyone.  We're in, at least, the easy situation in
which almost any alternative would be better.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[geni]

2009/7/7 Mark Wagner :
> Every few years, English-derived programming languages become
> fashionable as a solution for programming being difficult, and every
> few years, another generation of advocates discovers that it isn't the
> obscure codewords and symbols that make programming difficult.

Programing being difficult isn't out problem (at least not going by
what people have managed to do with templates so far). Programing
being inaccessible is.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[wjhonson]

 Not sure I'm exactly following that.
Are you suggesting creating methods with inputs and outputs out of underlying 
templates and then allowing those methods to be called directly, so essentially 
building a higher-level language out of these templates as the tools ?




You'd have to build templates up from raw code, without library tools,
accomplish what we do with the templates tools now.



 


 


 

-Original Message-
From: George Herbert 
To: English Wikipedia 
Sent: Mon, Jul 6, 2009 4:28 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] MediaWiki is getting a new programming language










On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM,  wrote:
>
> ?Of course you've hit the nail right on the head.
> I don't think we want to create a brand-new additional language that people 
have to learn just to code
> for Wikipedia.? What we'd want to do, is use an existing language, so that 
some people can jump right
> in with both feet and others, who want to, can pick up an instruction manual 
and start stabbing about.
>
>> If you'd like to propose a BASIC syntax for the tools we need, that
>> might make the argument more cogent and viable. ?Of necessity you need
>> to base that on a BASIC which is freeware and portable.

Um.  Raw BASIC is not well structured to do the specific text
processing we're looking for.

You'd have to build templates up from raw code, without library tools,
accomplish what we do with the templates tools now.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l




 

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[George Herbert]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 4:14 PM,  wrote:
>
>  Of course you've hit the nail right on the head.
> I don't think we want to create a brand-new additional language that people 
> have to learn just to code
> for Wikipedia.? What we'd want to do, is use an existing language, so that 
> some people can jump right
> in with both feet and others, who want to, can pick up an instruction manual 
> and start stabbing about.
>
>> If you'd like to propose a BASIC syntax for the tools we need, that
>> might make the argument more cogent and viable.  Of necessity you need
>> to base that on a BASIC which is freeware and portable.

Um.  Raw BASIC is not well structured to do the specific text
processing we're looking for.

You'd have to build templates up from raw code, without library tools,
accomplish what we do with the templates tools now.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[wjhonson]

 Yes I mean PRINT is far more obvious what it's doing.? Most programmers can 
understand what ADD, COUNT or FORMAT is supposed to do, in general.? Sure you 
could just use "/" or "~" or "^" but it's not obvious what they do without a 
manual.




Me: "Compromising between efficiently terse syntax and efficiently expressive
natural language gets... "  .. a functional language?   Haskell?



 


 


 

-Original Message-
From: stevertigo 
To: English Wikipedia 
Sent: Mon, Jul 6, 2009 3:56 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] MediaWiki is getting a new programming language










Forgive my pseudocode (based on Neil's example):

function A: search ":" = [0],  scope (before [0]),  count [a-z] = [1],
format [1] [TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED  HEXADECIMAL NUMBER]  /* :-P */,
format [1] [lowercase], move [1] [0].

Breakdown:
function A:
 search ":" = [0],  // search for ":" and set it to
the 0 parameter
 scope (before [0]),// set the scope for the next
operation as before 0 (":")
 count [a-z] = [1],   // count anything a-z within the
scope and set it to another parameter 1
 format [1] [TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED HEXADECIMAL NUMBER],
 format [1] [lowercase],  // shouldn't affect numbers, and hex = A-F
anyway, so "A-F distinction = unnecessary
 move [1] [0]. // put the results of 1 in the 0
position, period (.) ambiguously =  stop symbol

I'm not sure this gets all of it. IANAP

Me: "Compromising between efficiently terse syntax and efficiently expressive
natural language gets... "  .. a functional language?   Haskell?

-Steven

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



 

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[wjhonson]

 Of course you've hit the nail right on the head.
I don't think we want to create a brand-new additional language that people 
have to learn just to code for Wikipedia.? What we'd want to do, is use an 
existing language, so that some people can jump right in with both feet and 
others, who want to, can pick up an instruction manual and start stabbing about.




If you'd like to propose a BASIC syntax for the tools we need, that
might make the argument more cogent and viable.  Of necessity you need
to base that on a BASIC which is freeware and portable.



 


 


 

-Original Message-
From: George Herbert 
To: English Wikipedia 
Sent: Mon, Jul 6, 2009 12:24 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] MediaWiki is getting a new programming language










On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 12:01 PM,  wrote:
> The reason BASIC was and still enjoys wide popularity is because it's
> easier to learn.

I don't know that BASIC in any of its flavors lines up well with the
functional requirements needed for easy (compact, easy to read, easy
to learn how to program) template structure and so forth.

If you'd like to propose a BASIC syntax for the tools we need, that
might make the argument more cogent and viable.  Of necessity you need
to base that on a BASIC which is freeware and portable.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



 

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Mark Wagner]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 19:23,  wrote:
>
>  The language chosen will hopefully be as ENGLISH-like as possible, even it 
> that means it requires more typing.? The hyper-complex and excessively 
> structured codes of most languages make it difficult for the vast majority of 
> our contributors to even try to make a break into them.
>
> In addition to that, English-like languages are easier for programmers in 
> other languages to pick up because they seem more sensible than learning a 
> whole new set of obscure codewords and symbols.? A language that uses "AND" 
> instead of "&", "+" or "[]".? A language that uses "NOT" instead of "-", "/" 
> or "_".

Every few years, English-derived programming languages become
fashionable as a solution for programming being difficult, and every
few years, another generation of advocates discovers that it isn't the
obscure codewords and symbols that make programming difficult.

-- 
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

Forgive my pseudocode (based on Neil's example):

function A: search ":" = [0],  scope (before [0]),  count [a-z] = [1],
format [1] [TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED  HEXADECIMAL NUMBER]  /* :-P */,
format [1] [lowercase], move [1] [0].

Breakdown:
function A:
 search ":" = [0],  // search for ":" and set it to
the 0 parameter
 scope (before [0]),// set the scope for the next
operation as before 0 (":")
 count [a-z] = [1],   // count anything a-z within the
scope and set it to another parameter 1
 format [1] [TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED HEXADECIMAL NUMBER],
 format [1] [lowercase],  // shouldn't affect numbers, and hex = A-F
anyway, so "A-F distinction = unnecessary
 move [1] [0]. // put the results of 1 in the 0
position, period (.) ambiguously =  stop symbol

I'm not sure this gets all of it. IANAP

Me: "Compromising between efficiently terse syntax and efficiently expressive
natural language gets... "  .. a functional language?   Haskell?

-Steven

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Ian Woollard]

Yeah, that could work... if we lived in bizarro world where all the
developers actually liked COBOL!

If I know software engineers, over their dead bodies!

On 06/07/2009, Neil Harris  wrote:
> stevertigo wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 3:54 AM, Neil Harris
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Consider the difference between the ease of writing, say, the Python-like
>>>  print "%02x" % find(":", param[1])
>>> or even the Lisp-like
>>>  (print (fmt "%02x" (find ":" (param 1
>>> compared to writing an "English-like" equivalent such as
>>>  PRINT THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF THE
>>> COLON CHARACTER IN THE FIRST POSITIONAL PARAMETER FORMATTED AS A
>>> TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED HEXADECIMAL NUMBER USING LOWERCASE LETTERS FOR THE
>>> HEX DIGITS A TO F
>>>
>>
>> Your example is a bit unfair though, Neil. For one, how would it be
>> parsed?
>> Two, it only implies and does not explicitly state the "find/search"
>> functionality
>> you use in the examples.
>>
> Oh, don't tempt me to write an implementation... a grammar for it might
> look something like this:
>
> command ::= print-expr | ...
>
> expr ::= find-expr | param-expr  | arithmetic-expr | strong-expr
>
> no-default-param-expr ::= "THE" ordinal-number-name "POSITIONAL
> PARAMETER" | "THE PARAMETER CALLED" name-expr
>
> param-expr ::= no-default-param-expr ["UNLESS THE PARAMETER IS
> UNDEFINED, IN WHICH CASE USE" expr "INSTEAD"]
>
> find-expr ::= "THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF"
> expr "IN" expr
>
> arithmetic-expr ::= expr "MULTIPLIED BY" expr | expr "ADDED TO" expr |
> ... | "OPEN BRACKETS" expr "CLOSE BRACKETS"
>
> substitution-expr ::= "THE STRING" expr ", SUBSTITUTING THE STRING" expr
> "FOR THE STRING" expr "THROUGHOUT"
>
> string-expr ::= "THE" char-name "CHARACTER"
>
> print-statement ::= "PRINT" expr "FORMATTED AS" print-format
>
> print-format-atom ::= "A LITERAL STRING" | "A" ordinal-number-name
> "-DIGIT" [ "ZERO-PADDED" ] ["HEXADECIMAL" | "OCTAL" | "DECIMAL" ]
> "NUMBER" ["USING" ["UPPERCASE" | "LOWERCASE" "LETTERS FOR THE HEX DIGITS
> A TO F"]
>
> print-format ::= print-format-atom | print-format-atom "FOLLOWED BY"
> print-format
>
> ordinal-number-name ::= "FIRST" | "SECOND" | "THIRD" | "FOURTH" ...
>
> cardinal-number-name ::= "ONE" | "TWO" | "THREE" | "FOUR" ...
>
> and then throw it at a packrat parser or similar shortest-length parser
> for nondeterministic languages... I leave code generation and the
> runtime environment as an exercise for the student. To keep fully within
> the spirit of the exercise, don't forget to add automatic type coercion
> of all data types to strings wherever necessary.
>
> -- Neil
>
>
> ___
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


-- 
-Ian Woollard

"All the world's a stage... but you'll grow out of it eventually."

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Neil Harris wrote:

> Oh, don't tempt me to write an implementation... a grammar for it might
> look something like this:

I thought we were keeping this conversation high level.

-Steven

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Neil Harris]

stevertigo wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 3:54 AM, Neil Harris wrote:
>
>   
>> Consider the difference between the ease of writing, say, the Python-like
>>  print "%02x" % find(":", param[1])
>> or even the Lisp-like
>>  (print (fmt "%02x" (find ":" (param 1
>> compared to writing an "English-like" equivalent such as
>>  PRINT THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF THE
>> COLON CHARACTER IN THE FIRST POSITIONAL PARAMETER FORMATTED AS A
>> TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED HEXADECIMAL NUMBER USING LOWERCASE LETTERS FOR THE
>> HEX DIGITS A TO F
>> 
>
> Your example is a bit unfair though, Neil. For one, how would it be parsed?
> Two, it only implies and does not explicitly state the "find/search"
> functionality
> you use in the examples.
>   
Oh, don't tempt me to write an implementation... a grammar for it might 
look something like this:

command ::= print-expr | ...

expr ::= find-expr | param-expr  | arithmetic-expr | strong-expr

no-default-param-expr ::= "THE" ordinal-number-name "POSITIONAL 
PARAMETER" | "THE PARAMETER CALLED" name-expr

param-expr ::= no-default-param-expr ["UNLESS THE PARAMETER IS 
UNDEFINED, IN WHICH CASE USE" expr "INSTEAD"]

find-expr ::= "THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF" 
expr "IN" expr

arithmetic-expr ::= expr "MULTIPLIED BY" expr | expr "ADDED TO" expr | 
... | "OPEN BRACKETS" expr "CLOSE BRACKETS"

substitution-expr ::= "THE STRING" expr ", SUBSTITUTING THE STRING" expr 
"FOR THE STRING" expr "THROUGHOUT"

string-expr ::= "THE" char-name "CHARACTER"

print-statement ::= "PRINT" expr "FORMATTED AS" print-format

print-format-atom ::= "A LITERAL STRING" | "A" ordinal-number-name 
"-DIGIT" [ "ZERO-PADDED" ] ["HEXADECIMAL" | "OCTAL" | "DECIMAL" ]  
"NUMBER" ["USING" ["UPPERCASE" | "LOWERCASE" "LETTERS FOR THE HEX DIGITS 
A TO F"]

print-format ::= print-format-atom | print-format-atom "FOLLOWED BY" 
print-format

ordinal-number-name ::= "FIRST" | "SECOND" | "THIRD" | "FOURTH" ...

cardinal-number-name ::= "ONE" | "TWO" | "THREE" | "FOUR" ...

and then throw it at a packrat parser or similar shortest-length parser 
for nondeterministic languages... I leave code generation and the 
runtime environment as an exercise for the student. To keep fully within 
the spirit of the exercise, don't forget to add automatic type coercion 
of all data types to strings wherever necessary.

-- Neil


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Neil Harris]

> In a message dated 7/6/2009 3:54:38 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
> use...@tonal.clara.co.uk writes:
> 
> 
>> Although the point could have been put more tactfully, I think the 
>> salient point here is that "English-like" programming languages have 
>> been tried before many times, and have (with the possible exception of 
>> COBOL) consistently been rejected in favour of compact equation-like 
>> languages.>>
> 
> -
> 
> Neil let me just point out in counter-point that the two longest-living 
> third-generation langages, COBOL and BASIC are both still alive and well. 
> 
> Both use a most English-like foundation.
> 
> 
>  Is Python more represented in want-ads ?  Most businesses still use older 
> generation languages, regardless of what is being taught in university.
> 
> Will Johnson

The reason why COBOL and SQL endure isn't their English-like syntax, 
which is a relic of the era in which they were designed, but because 
they were the first just-good-enough systems of their type.

The same is true of C, which is an appallingly badly designed language 
by modern standards; but endures for the same reasons; familiarity, 
backwards compatibility and the widespread availability of trained 
programmers. But in its time, C was a _vast_ improvement over assembler, 
which is what it existed to replace.

[Regarding want ads: granted, there are billions of lines of COBOL and 
BASIC code out there in the business world, but how many new projects do 
you see being created in COBOL or BASIC, and how many job ads for COBOL 
and BASIC programmers? http://langpop.com/ has a pretty good survey of 
what's actually used in the wider world. Gnomic ALGOL-esque languages 
like C, Java C++ and PHP lead the pack.]

The MediaWiki template language survives for the same reason. This is 
not to say that it's perfect, or even very good: but it works, has a 
large installed base of legacy code, and general availability of the 
appropriate skills in the existing base of "programmers", and is just 
good enough to serve its purpose, and therefore survives on for the same 
reasons as above.

Given the large installed base of existing template code, I believe it 
would a much better idea to start with the template language we 
currently have, and clean it up incrementally, than it would be to 
rewrite it from scratch and risk second system syndrome.

Fortunately, it's (necessarily) machine-parsable, and it shouldn't be an 
insuperable task to clean up the syntax whilst still running alongside 
the old code, and remaining (mostly) backwards compatible. If this is 
done in stages, the current template coder base should learn the new 
syntax in parallel with the changes, and the new syntax should be much 
easier for new template programmers to learn.

This has actually been done twice before: once with the creation of 
proper conditionals and the retirement of {{qif}}, and a second time 
with a subtle change in the semantics of the template system to make it 
faster and easier to parse and run.

Perhaps the next move should be the replacement of {{{name|default}}} 
with something like ${name|default}, with $name as a short form for the 
common case?

-- Neil


___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[George Herbert]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 12:01 PM,  wrote:
> The reason BASIC was and still enjoys wide popularity is because it's
> easier to learn.

I don't know that BASIC in any of its flavors lines up well with the
functional requirements needed for easy (compact, easy to read, easy
to learn how to program) template structure and so forth.

If you'd like to propose a BASIC syntax for the tools we need, that
might make the argument more cogent and viable.  Of necessity you need
to base that on a BASIC which is freeware and portable.


-- 
-george william herbert
george.herb...@gmail.com

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 12:20 PM, geni wrote:

> While it's true program languages have pretty much given up experimenting 
> with natural
> language and similar, it's also true that programing has shifted from
> something any computer user has to do to something rather more
> specialised. We on the other hand want to do the opposite. We need to
> have something that non programmers can use which was effectively the
> problem that BASIC was looking to solve.

Hm.

-Steven

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[geni]

2009/7/6 stevertigo :
> On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:21 AM,  wrote:
>
>> Neil let me just point out in counter-point that the two longest-living
>> third-generation langages, COBOL and BASIC are both still alive and well.
>> Both use a most English-like foundation.
>>  Is Python more represented in want-ads ?  Most businesses still use older
>> generation languages, regardless of what is being taught in university.
>
> Ball-and-chain legacy issues substantiate your argument?
>

BASIC is around for more than legacy issues and is of interest to us
since it was meant to solve much the same problem (how to make
programing accessible to non programmers). While it's true program
languages have pretty much given up experimenting with natural
language and similar it's also true that programing has shifted from
something any computer user has to do to something rather more
specialised. We on the other hand want to do the opposite. We need to
have something that non programmers can use which was effectively the
problem that BASIC was looking to solve.

Most existing languages were not built to solve that problem so using
them would be unwise.

What we should do depends on a number of factors. If we think we have
worked out most of the things templates are likely to be used for (we
had better we are running out of space in articles to put them) then a
custom designed language which is setup to make those functions
accessible but with a full general purpose setup to allow for people
to do other things (incidentally that would be 1,2 and 3 of what
wikipedia thinks are the eight design principles of BASIC) would in
many ways be the best approach.

If we think there is a lot of stuff that people are going to want to
use templates for that has not yet been done then a generalised
language with simplification for existing common functions bolted on
would likely be a better approach.

Heh it would be quite possible to make construction of infoboxes
fairly easy in a basic like language. There are various reasons why
this is a bad idea (adding reasons for retaining capslock is never a
good idea). Still BASIC's handling of IF, THEN, ELSE is something of
an improvement on the current setup.



-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 3:54 AM, Neil Harris wrote:

> Consider the difference between the ease of writing, say, the Python-like
>  print "%02x" % find(":", param[1])
> or even the Lisp-like
>  (print (fmt "%02x" (find ":" (param 1
> compared to writing an "English-like" equivalent such as
>  PRINT THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF THE
> COLON CHARACTER IN THE FIRST POSITIONAL PARAMETER FORMATTED AS A
> TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED HEXADECIMAL NUMBER USING LOWERCASE LETTERS FOR THE
> HEX DIGITS A TO F

Your example is a bit unfair though, Neil. For one, how would it be parsed?
Two, it only implies and does not explicitly state the "find/search"
functionality
you use in the examples.

Interestingly, this seems to follow the useful form for a teaching tool.
Compromising between efficiently terse syntax and efficiently expressive
natural language gets... ?

-Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[WJhonson]

In a message dated 7/6/2009 11:46:18 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
stv...@gmail.com writes:


> ..if you dislike Lua, Python, etc. because they aren't similar enough
> to English, then Neil's offering:  "PRINT THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS
> BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF THE
> COLON CHARACTER IN THE..." makes the substantial point, in addition to
> being esoterically funny.>>
> 

--

The reason BASIC was and still enjoys wide popularity is because it's 
easier to learn.

The example does not make the substantial point because it veers so 
strongly to the opposite end of the spectrum as to be unrelated to the argument 
whatsoever.  I never suggested that a language should *mimic* English (or a 
bizarre type of hyper-English).

I welcome however, anyone who wants to actually conduct this argument, on 
Earth.

Will Johnson




**
Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals. 
(http://personals.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntuslove0003)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

Continued...
..if you dislike Lua, Python, etc. because they aren't similar enough
to English, then Neil's offering:  "PRINT THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS
BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF THE
COLON CHARACTER IN THE..." makes the substantial point, in addition to
being esoterically funny.

-Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 11:21 AM,  wrote:

> Neil let me just point out in counter-point that the two longest-living
> third-generation langages, COBOL and BASIC are both still alive and well.
> Both use a most English-like foundation.
>  Is Python more represented in want-ads ?  Most businesses still use older
> generation languages, regardless of what is being taught in university.

Ball-and-chain legacy issues substantiate your argument?

Note my usage of "parasitic" earlier may have been a bit mistated - no
programming
language is really "parasitic" to any natural language, it just
borrows certain concepts
and words from it.

In reality I don't think anyone disagrees with your basic point. But
if you dislike Lua, Python,
etc. because they aren't similar enough to English, then usenet.tonal.clara's

-Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[WJhonson]

In a message dated 7/6/2009 3:54:38 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
use...@tonal.clara.co.uk writes:


> PRINT THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF THE 
> COLON CHARACTER IN THE FIRST POSITIONAL PARAMETER FORMATTED AS A 
> TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED HEXADECIMAL NUMBER USING LOWERCASE LETTERS FOR THE 
> HEX DIGITS A TO F>>

-

You're being silly.
You know quite well that no language exists like this.

Will




**
Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals. 
(http://personals.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntuslove0003)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[WJhonson]

In a message dated 7/6/2009 3:54:38 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
use...@tonal.clara.co.uk writes:


> Although the point could have been put more tactfully, I think the 
> salient point here is that "English-like" programming languages have 
> been tried before many times, and have (with the possible exception of 
> COBOL) consistently been rejected in favour of compact equation-like 
> languages.>>

-

Neil let me just point out in counter-point that the two longest-living 
third-generation langages, COBOL and BASIC are both still alive and well. 

Both use a most English-like foundation.


 Is Python more represented in want-ads ?  Most businesses still use older 
generation languages, regardless of what is being taught in university.

Will Johnson




**
Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals. 
(http://personals.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntuslove0003)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Neil Harris]

wjhon...@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 7/6/2009 12:12:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
> stevag...@gmail.com writes:
>
>
>   
>> Your point is made, understood, and soundly rebutted. An
>> "english-like" language is not desirable, feasible, or going to
>> happen.>>
>> 
>
> --
>
> I propose that A) you are not the authority invested in deciding this 
> issue; and B) your approach is overly antagonistic and confrontational.
>
> Will
>
>   
Will,

Although the point could have been put more tactfully, I think the 
salient point here is that "English-like" programming languages have 
been tried before many times, and have (with the possible exception of 
COBOL) consistently been rejected in favour of compact equation-like 
languages.

Consider the difference between the ease of writing, say, the Python-like

  print "%02x" % find(":", param[1])

or even the Lisp-like

  (print (fmt "%02x" (find ":" (param 1

compared to writing an "English-like" equivalent such as

  PRINT THE NUMBER OF CHARACTERS BEFORE THE FIRST OCCURRENCE OF THE 
COLON CHARACTER IN THE FIRST POSITIONAL PARAMETER FORMATTED AS A 
TWO-DIGIT ZERO-PADDED HEXADECIMAL NUMBER USING LOWERCASE LETTERS FOR THE 
HEX DIGITS A TO F

If you think this an unfair example, please could you show how your 
proposed English-like language would handle this example better than the 
above?

-- Neil




___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[WJhonson]

In a message dated 7/6/2009 12:12:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
stevag...@gmail.com writes:


> Your point is made, understood, and soundly rebutted. An
> "english-like" language is not desirable, feasible, or going to
> happen.>>

--

I propose that A) you are not the authority invested in deciding this 
issue; and B) your approach is overly antagonistic and confrontational.

Will




**
Looking for love this summer? Find it now on AOL Personals.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 4:08 AM,  wrote:
> My point is and was that whatever is used to replace the current system,
> should be a language that is as English-like as possible.

Your point is made, understood, and soundly rebutted. An
"english-like" language is not desirable, feasible, or going to
happen.

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Ian Woollard]

On 03/07/2009, geni  wrote:
> And with the exception of the Jackson issue I understand those issues
> have been fixed. The jackson issue is somewhat questionable if it can
> be solved by a new code setup. Give people a new code setup and they
> will find a way to do unexpected things with that to. Remember the
> days when VFD made made a significant dent in server load?

Maybe, although if there's particular bottlenecks, you're usually
better off just optimising those; hardcoding a few common templates in
some non user accessible language is likely to be a lot less work than
an entirely new programming language. Actually there doubtless are
already multiple languages available.

> Programmers are not who we are primarily interested in with regards to
> template code. There are far fewer programmers than non programmers
> and they are more in demand by open source groups.
>
> It's far more important that our template code be accessible to non
> programmers than it be something programmers like. It also needs to be
> accessible within a wikipedia environment something a traditional
> language is unlikely to be. Template code may look bad but in practice
> it's fairly resistant to people copying and pasting then playing with
> to get what they want.

The other way to go is just to optimise the heck out of the existing
template system, with enough caching and hashing or run time
compilation most things run quickly enough. Still, doing this is
usually complex.

> Old code unless bot eliminated (msg:stub for example) tends not to die.

Yup. Conspiracy theories and programming languages. Both can be fun.

> --
> geni

-- 
-Ian Woollard

"All the world's a stage... but you'll grow out of it eventually."

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[David Gerard]

2009/7/3 Steve Bennett :

> The thing I find astonishing is that people are willing to work with
> these templates and actually maintain them. I've coded regexes, tcl,
> sh, prolog, haskell, C..., but I have absolutely no desire to get this
> crap on my hands.
> Anyone know if the people who work with these templates are
> experienced coders, or just wikipedians who have gotten into it as a
> pleasant sunday afternoon mindfuck?


You mean, of course, [[Brainfuck]].

I'm wondering if we could do our templates in BANCstar.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Matthew Brown]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 11:08 AM,  wrote:
> My point is and was that whatever is used to replace the current system,
> should be a language that is as English-like as possible.

I think there's a substantial body of knowledge that shows that a
surface English-like-ness doesn't actually make programming easier or
more accessible; in fact, because a programming language never does
support more than a tiny bit of English syntax, it actually makes it
harder to remember what English syntactic constructions are meaningful
in the language when other, equivalent syntaxes do not work.

What does make it easier to learn and comprehend include factors like
a simple and clean syntax and an ease of accessing the functionality
that's useful in the problem domain.

English-like syntax seems to be better as a /sales/ feature than a
learning one; it seems, before actually trying to learn it, that it
should be simpler.

I'd believed that you were implying that a general purpose scripting
language would be worse in terms of comprehensibility and
accessibility than the current templates+parser-functions language,
and boggling at that, but perhaps I misinterpreted you there.

In my opinion, ANY of the suggested alternates would be better in a
quite substantial and meaningful way than what we currently have, for
both programmers and non-programmers.

On the other hand, that doesn't mean that some solutions would not be
preferable to others, even if any of them is better than what we have
right now.

If I misunderstood you, which I think was quite likely, my apologies!

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[geni]

2009/7/3 Aryeh Gregor :
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Apoc 2400 wrote:
>> The current template code is ugly, but it does work.
>
> It uses up an enormous amount of CPU resources, and there have been
> some cases where it's spectacularly failed.  Complicated templates
> have been responsible for bringing down sites more than once.  If
> [[Michael Jackson]] had been written in simple wikitext with no
> templates, the rush to read it probably wouldn't have brought down
> Wikipedia, for instance -- it was only so severe because the page took
> many seconds to parse.
>
> There have been previous incidents too.  In one case I can't recall
> the specifics of, a sysadmin had to delete a template on eswiki after
> it crashed at least that site (I think also affecting other sites on
> the same cluster, can't recall).

And with the exception of the Jackson issue I understand those issues
have been fixed. The jackson issue is somewhat questionable if it can
be solved by a new code setup. Give people a new code setup and they
will find a way to do unexpected things with that to. Remember the
days when VFD made made a significant dent in server load?

Heh issue long predates wikipedia in any case. Back in the early 70s
Southampton university created SOFOR because standard FORTRAN didn't
compile fast enough.

> Not to mention, of course, that there are plenty of people (especially
> programmers) who would be happy to help out with some template coding
> -- but don't because the code is so horrifying.

Programmers are not who we are primarily interested in with regards to
template code. There are far fewer programmers than non programmers
and they are more in demand by open source groups.

It's far more important that our template code be accessible to non
programmers than it be something programmers like. It also needs to be
accessible within a wikipedia environment something a traditional
language is unlikely to be. Template code may look bad but in practice
it's fairly resistant to people copying and pasting then playing with
to get what they want.

>No one is suggesting that ParserFunctions will be disabled.  The new
>system will be added in parallel, and assuming it's really superior,
>it will replace ParserFunctions over time.

Questionable. Check out the templates on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Pinsent

Old code unless bot eliminated (msg:stub for example) tends not to die.

-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[geni]

2009/7/3 Carcharoth :
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Judson Dunn wrote:
>
> 
>
>> {{#ifeq: string 1 | string 2 | value if true | value if false }} .
>
> The help pages for templates are not very helpful.
>
> Instinctively, and by looking at examples, I sort of know the above,
> but I've never seen a help page that clearly explains how to use
> templates and parser functions, let alone how to construct tables
> (more a WYSIWYG problem). Maybe I've been looking at the wrong pages,
> but if there are pages that clearly teach people how to construct
> templates and tables, I'd really like to be pointed at them.
>
> Carcharoth
>

Tables are an issue yes. I don't do much with templates but when I've
wanted to use ParserFunctions I've either copied and pasted or worked
from

http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:ParserFunctions

On the other hand the formal help page is a complete mess:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Template



-- 
geni

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Aryeh Gregor]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Apoc 2400 wrote:
> The current template code is ugly, but it does work.

It uses up an enormous amount of CPU resources, and there have been
some cases where it's spectacularly failed.  Complicated templates
have been responsible for bringing down sites more than once.  If
[[Michael Jackson]] had been written in simple wikitext with no
templates, the rush to read it probably wouldn't have brought down
Wikipedia, for instance -- it was only so severe because the page took
many seconds to parse.

There have been previous incidents too.  In one case I can't recall
the specifics of, a sysadmin had to delete a template on eswiki after
it crashed at least that site (I think also affecting other sites on
the same cluster, can't recall).

Not to mention, of course, that there are plenty of people (especially
programmers) who would be happy to help out with some template coding
-- but don't because the code is so horrifying.

> I understand the developers want to replace it with a new template
> programming language, but we should be aware of the risks. Starting over
> from scratch and making it clean this time is one of the most common ways to
> begin a spectacular failure in software development. Joel Spolsky write a
> good column on it in 2000:
> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog69.html

No one is suggesting that ParserFunctions will be disabled.  The new
system will be added in parallel, and assuming it's really superior,
it will replace ParserFunctions over time.  (That essay is irrelevant
here anyway.  We're not talking about rewriting MediaWiki or any other
project from scratch.)

> Is it even possible to sandbox Lua to guard against any exploits, even the
> kind that just overloads the servers?

That's one of the major problems with the suggestion.  It's part of
why nothing has been finalized yet.  (The other key problem is making
sure Wikipedia content is easily usable by third parties on shared
hosting.)

> Will it integrate well with articles
> written in Wikicode?

That would depend on the implementation details, which are very far
from being worked out.

> How long will it take until we can use it?

This is all still purely theoretical at this point.  We haven't even
worked out if a solution is possible, let alone started setting even
the most preliminary timetables.

> Most people don't need to understand advanced templates, just use it. There
> is actually no lack of powerful templates. We have a lot of them. The
> problem is that they are too hard to use.

Partly because some things are too difficult to do in ParserFunctions.
 More intelligent parameter handling would be possible using a real
language.  Of course, StringFunctions would work as well, to a lesser
extent.

> It is used as
> {{Birth date and age|1993|2|4|mf=yes}}. If we had the StringFunctions
> extension enabled it could be simplified to take dates like 1993-02-04
> rather than 1993|2|4. Perhaps it could even take plain text dates like
> "February 4, 1993".

This should already work just fine using {{#time}}.  I'd say most
likely, nobody's bothered to do it because template programming is so
incredibly obnoxious that only a dedicated few can muster the
willpower to struggle through it.  A real language with normal syntax
would mean that someone like me -- a programmer -- could go over right
now and fix it up in a couple of minutes.  But I'm not even going to
try messing with such a mess of curly braces.

> We are stuck with templates that are hard to use because the developers are
> against allowing useful programming constructs in wikicode.

Not all are.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Carcharoth]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Apoc 2400 wrote:



> {{Birth date and age}} is a rather popular template we use to show a persons
> birth date and automatically calculate the current age. It allows us to
> provide this without having to update it every year. I guess some developers
> hate us for doing something like that in wikicode, but hey, it works. The
> only problem it that it's hard to read in the article code. It is used as
> {{Birth date and age|1993|2|4|mf=yes}}. If we had the StringFunctions
> extension enabled it could be simplified to take dates like 1993-02-04
> rather than 1993|2|4. Perhaps it could even take plain text dates like
> "February 4, 1993". If we had the variables extension one could specify the
> dateformat (month or day first) in one place in the article and template
> like {{Birth date and age}} would follow.

I think we *already* have templates that can take February 4, 1993 (or
something similar). They had some weird name, similar to the current
templates, but slightly different. I can't find them right now, but
maybe someone else remembers them?

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Apoc 2400]

The current template code is ugly, but it does work. Few people can
understand the source code of the more intricate templates, which is a
shame, but we are getting very good use out of the ugly wikicode. We have a
huge number of templates that do a lot of good with the limited
ParserFunctions we have.

I understand the developers want to replace it with a new template
programming language, but we should be aware of the risks. Starting over
from scratch and making it clean this time is one of the most common ways to
begin a spectacular failure in software development. Joel Spolsky write a
good column on it in 2000:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog69.html

Is it even possible to sandbox Lua to guard against any exploits, even the
kind that just overloads the servers? Will it integrate well with articles
written in Wikicode? How long will it take until we can use it?

Most people don't need to understand advanced templates, just use it. There
is actually no lack of powerful templates. We have a lot of them. The
problem is that they are too hard to use.

{{Birth date and age}} is a rather popular template we use to show a persons
birth date and automatically calculate the current age. It allows us to
provide this without having to update it every year. I guess some developers
hate us for doing something like that in wikicode, but hey, it works. The
only problem it that it's hard to read in the article code. It is used as
{{Birth date and age|1993|2|4|mf=yes}}. If we had the StringFunctions
extension enabled it could be simplified to take dates like 1993-02-04
rather than 1993|2|4. Perhaps it could even take plain text dates like
"February 4, 1993". If we had the variables extension one could specify the
dateformat (month or day first) in one place in the article and template
like {{Birth date and age}} would follow.

We are stuck with templates that are hard to use because the developers are
against allowing useful programming constructs in wikicode. I really
wouldn't mind a good "real" programming language for templates, but should
we really but all eggs in one basket?

/Apoc2400
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Aryeh Gregor]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 2:15 PM,  wrote:
> Rather I would advocate a system which is as easy to use as we can make it.
>  Not as hard as we can imagine it.

I would recommend that the criterion used be "as easy as possible for
the community to maintain".  Languages that are harder for beginners
are in many cases easier to use in the long run.  Compare VB or PHP to
. . . any language people actually like.  :)

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Carcharoth]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Judson Dunn wrote:



> {{#ifeq: string 1 | string 2 | value if true | value if false }} .

The help pages for templates are not very helpful.

Instinctively, and by looking at examples, I sort of know the above,
but I've never seen a help page that clearly explains how to use
templates and parser functions, let alone how to construct tables
(more a WYSIWYG problem). Maybe I've been looking at the wrong pages,
but if there are pages that clearly teach people how to construct
templates and tables, I'd really like to be pointed at them.

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[WJhonson]

In a message dated 7/3/2009 9:45:32 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com writes:


> Happily, it's not necessary that the *average* user be able to
> contribute to programming.  >>

--

Let me just point out that I never stated the above in the first place.  
The average user hasn't even figured out how to use the  system, and 
probably less than ten percent understand {templates} at all even to include 
them, let alone to edit them.

So I would never advocate a system where the average person can do it.
Rather I would advocate a system which is as easy to use as we can make it. 
 Not as hard as we can imagine it.

Will




**
Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the 
grill. (http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood0005)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[WJhonson]

In a message dated 7/3/2009 1:45:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
mor...@gmail.com writes:


> Do you really think any of these would be a higher barrier for entry
> than the current template and parser-functions system?  Possibly the
> current system is more egalitarian only in that it is painful for
> those who do know how to program as well as those who don't.>>

My point is and was that whatever is used to replace the current system, 
should be a language that is as English-like as possible.

What point are you responding to?  Perhaps it's one I never made.

Will Johnson




**
Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the 
grill. (http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood0005)
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Judson Dunn]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> Anyone know if the people who work with these templates are
> experienced coders, or just wikipedians who have gotten into it as a
> pleasant sunday afternoon mindfuck?
>

I've done a few, not as complex as that one. It's not that
complicated, it's just that the logic is all nested bracket based
things so it looks terrible and is hard to read. I would say I'm an
amateur coder. :)

A simple statement starts out ok, it's just the nesting that makes
them crazy, and {} brackets are used for almost everything.

{{#ifeq: string 1 | string 2 | value if true | value if false }} .

Also, when you pass variables in, those are often numbered, and they
are frequently in the if statements so you get {{{1}}} things, and you
want to use templates in them, which also use {{brackets}} So
everything is using brackets and nesting. The parser is magic. :)

I didn't mean to make it seem like I didn't like parserfunctions and
templates. They are amazing, and I think one of the coolest and most
innovative parts about mediawiki honestly.

They basically allow general users to create content methods on the
fly that can do a ton of work. I think they are instrumental in the
fast development of a lot of features that would have taken much
longer had the user had to explain their vision to a developer.

Templates and parserfunctions are one of the best examples of
transparency and editor agency on wikipedia.

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:45 AM, stevertigo wrote:
> "Note that *if* "English" itself isn't sufficient where "English" lacks the 
> required (programming) concepts.

Should be: Note that English itself...

-Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 7:23 PM,  wrote:
> The language chosen will hopefully be as ENGLISH-like as possible, even it 
> that
> means it requires more typing.? The hyper-complex and excessively structured
> codes of most languages make it difficult for the vast majority of our 
> contributors to
> even try to make a break into them.
> In addition to that, English-like languages are easier for programmers in 
> other
> languages to pick up because they seem more sensible than learning a whole new
> set of obscure codewords and symbols.? A language that uses "AND" instead of
> "&", "+" or "[]".? A language that uses "NOT" instead of "-", "/" or "_".

It's easy to be a native English speaker and then demand another
system to be parasitic to it. Note that if "English" itself isn't
sufficient where "English" lacks the required (programming) concepts.
And there's probably no issue of using Farsi or Bengali anyway, as
all/most programming languages are already parasitic to English. (Lua,
mentioned previously, written by Brazilians, does not use Portuguese
for anything other than its name).

Part of the idea to begin with for using arbitrary symbols for
operator symbols is to strengthen the projections between programming
and mathematics, and maybe also in a certain way to transcend natural
language peculiarities. It's not about efficiency == parasitism to
English, but its about representing computing as mathematics. AIUI. Of
course the ASCII dependency issue puts characteristic limitations
(what WJ calls "easier") on things, but that's out of scope.

-Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Aryeh Gregor]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:23 PM,  wrote:
>  The language chosen will hopefully be as ENGLISH-like as possible, even it 
> that means it requires more typing.? The hyper-complex and excessively 
> structured codes of most languages make it difficult for the vast majority of 
> our contributors to even try to make a break into them.

Excessively English-like code is harder to work with, not easier.
Normally there are many ways to say something in English, and the
language has to arbitrarily pick one or two to support but not any
others.  That leads to considerable inconsistency.  From experience,
"easy-to-use" languages end up being harder to work with and maintain
on serious projects.  Look at the average programmer's attitude to
COBOL or SQL.  Such languages have been tried and are almost
universally agreed to be inferior by the people who actually have to
use them.

That's not to say you can't have reasonably understandable notation in
a good language.  I think Python strikes an excellent balance here.
But setting out to avoid "excessively structured" code is a bad idea.

Expecting a majority of our contributors to be able to contribute to
anything programming-related is unrealistic in any event.  A majority
of people who take introductory programming courses get an F -- and
that's even in the self-selected group that wants to learn how to
program.  It's not because the teachers or languages make it hard.
It's because most people just have a really difficult time
understanding how to program.

Happily, it's not necessary that the *average* user be able to
contribute to programming.  Only people who want to write flexible
templates will have to learn the syntax in any case.  The large
majority of users can stick to writing content, RC patrol, and a
million other things that are at least as important.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 6:50 AM, Sheldon Rampton 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

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Sheldon Rampton]

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. I remember hearing Aaron Swartz get  
a lot of laughter when he gave a talk at Wikimania 2006 and showed a  
Powerpoint slide with a screenful of templating gibberish that  
consisted of an huge, nested series of squiggly brackets, numerals and  
odd symbols. The line that drew the big laugh was when he asked if  
people thought that syntax was user-friendly.

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.  
Before parser functions existed, people used an even uglier workaround  
in which they achieved the RESULT of an if-then statement through a  
process so complicated and counter-intuitive that it would take  
several labored paragraphs for me to even describe it . It was because  
that system DIDN'T "work quite well" that parser functions were  
developed. They're not very easy to use either, which is why the  
developers are now trying to come up with a better alternative.

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. There are also oodles  
of extensions that people have written in attempts to add some widget  
or transclusion feature to Mediawiki such as Google maps or RSS feeds.  
If the current system "worked quite well," a lot of those add-on  
extensions would be unnecessary.

The fact that the current template system works poorly is no one's  
fault. It's a consequence of the ad hoc way that Mediawiki and  
Wikipedia have evolved, and of course that ad hoc evolution is no  
one's fault either. If everyone had waited until they had a perfect  
wiki platform before launching Wikipedia, the project would never have  
gotten off the ground. The tech people have generally performed  
admirably at building and maintaining the software that runs  
Wikipedia, and I think it's great that they're talking about ways to  
further improve the templating system, which could certainly use it. 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.

---

SHELDON RAMPTON
Research director, Center for Media & Democracy
Center for Media & Democracy
520 University Avenue, Suite 227
Madison, WI 53703
phone: 608-260-9713

Subscribe to our free Weekly Spin email:


Subscribe to our Weekly Radio Spin podcasts:


Read and add to articles on people, issues and groups shaping the
public agenda:


Support independent, public interest reporting:





___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Matthew Brown]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:27 AM,  wrote:
>
>  Well I think you know that isn't what I said.
> You half-read what I wrote and responded.
> Creating even higher barriers for people isn't the way to openness.

Do you really think any of these would be a higher barrier for entry
than the current template and parser-functions system?  Possibly the
current system is more egalitarian only in that it is painful for
those who do know how to program as well as those who don't.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[wjhonson]

 Well I think you know that isn't what I said.
You half-read what I wrote and responded. 
Creating even higher barriers for people isn't the way to openness.




<>


 


 


 

-Original Message-
From: Steve Bennett 
To: English Wikipedia 
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2009 8:47 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] MediaWiki is getting a new programming language










On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:23 PM,  wrote:
> ?The language chosen will hopefully be as ENGLISH-like as possible, even it 
that means it requires more typing.? The hyper-complex and excessively 
structured codes of most languages make it difficult for the vast majority of 
our contributors to even try to make a break into them.
>
> In addition to that, English-like languages are easier for programmers in 
other languages to pick up because they seem more sensible than learning a 
whole 
new set of obscure codewords and symbols.? A language that uses "AND" instead 
of 
"&", "+" or "[]".? A language that uses "NOT" instead of "-", "/" or "_".

I don't know if "programmability by a non-technical users" is a major
requirement. The real requirements are:
1) Secure
2) Fast
3) Sane, maintainable language
4) Existing interpreter. (Therefore, existing language...)

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



 

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Matthew Brown]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:09 PM, stevertigo wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Steve Bennett  wrote:
>
>> The thing I find astonishing is that people are willing to work with
>> these templates and actually maintain them. I've coded regexes, tcl,
>> sh, prolog, haskell, C..., but I have absolutely no desire to get this
>> crap on my hands.
>
> Hm. That "crap" seems to have worked quite well for a few years now.

A function, I think, of the desire for programmability, rather than
the qualities of the language.

-Matt

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 7:11 PM, Steve Bennett  wrote:

> The thing I find astonishing is that people are willing to work with
> these templates and actually maintain them. I've coded regexes, tcl,
> sh, prolog, haskell, C..., but I have absolutely no desire to get this
> crap on my hands.
>

Hm. That "crap" seems to have worked quite well for a few years now.

-Steve
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 12:23 PM,  wrote:
>  The language chosen will hopefully be as ENGLISH-like as possible, even it 
> that means it requires more typing.? The hyper-complex and excessively 
> structured codes of most languages make it difficult for the vast majority of 
> our contributors to even try to make a break into them.
>
> In addition to that, English-like languages are easier for programmers in 
> other languages to pick up because they seem more sensible than learning a 
> whole new set of obscure codewords and symbols.? A language that uses "AND" 
> instead of "&", "+" or "[]".? A language that uses "NOT" instead of "-", "/" 
> or "_".

I don't know if "programmability by a non-technical users" is a major
requirement. The real requirements are:
1) Secure
2) Fast
3) Sane, maintainable language
4) Existing interpreter. (Therefore, existing language...)

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Gwern Branwen]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:23 PM,  wrote:
> In addition to that, English-like languages are easier for programmers in 
> other languages to pick up because they seem more sensible than learning a 
> whole new set of obscure codewords and symbols.? A language that uses "AND" 
> instead of "&", "+" or "[]".? A language that uses "NOT" instead of "-", "/" 
> or "_".
>
> That would be helpful.
>
> Will Johnson

ADD COBOL TO SUGGESTED-LANGUAGES GIVING REJECTION.

- --
gwern
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEAREKAAYFAkpNdUEACgkQvpDo5Pfl1oIhjgCfa+FkurtMQ/IekAmEin12EJin
IsoAoJno9sNJkfDcsehb7rbJf43kDw/M
=fy7n
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[wjhonson]

 The language chosen will hopefully be as ENGLISH-like as possible, even it 
that means it requires more typing.? The hyper-complex and excessively 
structured codes of most languages make it difficult for the vast majority of 
our contributors to even try to make a break into them.

In addition to that, English-like languages are easier for programmers in other 
languages to pick up because they seem more sensible than learning a whole new 
set of obscure codewords and symbols.? A language that uses "AND" instead of 
"&", "+" or "[]".? A language that uses "NOT" instead of "-", "/" or "_".

That would be helpful.

Will Johnson





 


 

-Original Message-
From: Steve Bennett 
To: English Wikipedia 
Sent: Thu, Jul 2, 2009 7:11 pm
Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] MediaWiki is getting a new programming language










On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Judson Dunn wrote:
> It would replace the nightmare parserfunction language in the more
> complex templates. Here is a random example of one of those type:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Backlognav_inner&action=edit

The thing I find astonishing is that people are willing to work with
these templates and actually maintain them. I've coded regexes, tcl,
sh, prolog, haskell, C..., but I have absolutely no desire to get this
crap on my hands.

Anyone know if the people who work with these templates are
experienced coders, or just wikipedians who have gotten into it as a
pleasant sunday afternoon mindfuck?

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l



 

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 5:16 AM, Judson Dunn wrote:
> It would replace the nightmare parserfunction language in the more
> complex templates. Here is a random example of one of those type:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Backlognav_inner&action=edit

The thing I find astonishing is that people are willing to work with
these templates and actually maintain them. I've coded regexes, tcl,
sh, prolog, haskell, C..., but I have absolutely no desire to get this
crap on my hands.

Anyone know if the people who work with these templates are
experienced coders, or just wikipedians who have gotten into it as a
pleasant sunday afternoon mindfuck?

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Judson Dunn]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
> Can someone explain in layman's terms what this programming language
> thing is and how it relates to templates?
>

It would replace the nightmare parserfunction language in the more
complex templates. Here is a random example of one of those type:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Backlognav_inner&action=edit

It would replace that with something like PHP, javascript, Lua etc.
(real languages) We might even get syntax highlighting!

If you don't make or edit these templates it's no big deal to you, it
might allow the templates to be even more useful, but definitely won't
make them worse. If you do it will be helpful.

Personally any of the listed alternatives are so superior I don't have
any preference. :D

Judson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Cohesion

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[David Gerard]

2009/7/2 Carcharoth :

> Can someone explain in layman's terms what this programming language
> thing is and how it relates to templates?


OK. Open a complicated template. Let's use {{infobox actor}} here.
Look at the wikitext, and you'll see a sea of goop like this:

|image=
{{#if:{{{image|}}}|[[File:{{{image|}}}|{{#if:{{{image_size|{{{imagesize|}}|{{{image_size|{{{imagesize|}}|220px}}]]}}

That horrible collection of braces is actually the ParserFunctions
programming language:

  http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ParserFunctions

It lets you make a template that is actually a program to produce nice
results from relatively simple template parameters. The language
itself is documented here:

  http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Extension:ParserFunctions

It was created in a completely ad-hoc manner with little planning. So
it's (a) all but unreadable (b) hard to program (c) hard to optimise
on the server end (where these programs actually run).

So the discussion is about picking a new programming language that
wasn't just made up as someone went along. This will have the benefits
of allowing more people to get into template programming. This assists
the encyclopedia as it lets us make nice templates that do useful
things without non-geeks having to understand all the plumbing, it
lets geeks do the plumbing behind such things better, and it lets WMF
sysadmins run the servers without them melting quite as often.


- d.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Aryeh Gregor]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Cary Bass wrote:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> I was already annoyed at him because of his nonsensical comments in
>> the thread he was referencing, so that may have resulted in my
>> original reply being a little more harsh than it would usually have
>> been. I stand by everything I said, though.
>>
> Brian or Brion?

Brian.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Carcharoth wrote:
> Can someone explain in layman's terms what this programming language
> thing is and how it relates to templates?

It's not anything unless we can figure out something workable, which
isn't clear.  The idea would be that instead of using ParserFunctions
for programming templates, a "real" language like
Lua/JavaScript/PHP/Python/etc. would be made available.  This would
potentially allow much better template performance and maintenance.
It would have no direct effect on people other than template authors,
except that some templates could potentially be made more automated
and thus easier to use.

However, it's not clear that we can implement a language in a way
that's secure, efficient, *and* usable by wikis on shared hosting, so
I don't know whether anything will come of this.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Carcharoth]

On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 4:57 AM, Steve Bennett wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:59 PM, AGK wrote:
>> Um, why are we giving Brion such a hard time?
>
> He posted without enough context, got defensive when that was pointed
> out, then started snide remarks about developers not consulting the
> community and therefore making bad decisions. Since you asked.
>
> Now, enough meta-thread?

Seemingly not (from the other posts since).

Can someone explain in layman's terms what this programming language
thing is and how it relates to templates?

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Cary Bass]

Thomas Dalton wrote:
> 2009/7/1 AGK :
>   
>> Um, why are we giving Brion such a hard time? If his message didn't provide
>> enough details, then a polite request for clarification would be in order;
>> on the contrary, however, some of the replies to his post were just plain
>> rude. I do miss the days when we all played nice.
>> 
>
> I was already annoyed at him because of his nonsensical comments in
> the thread he was referencing, so that may have resulted in my
> original reply being a little more harsh than it would usually have
> been. I stand by everything I said, though.
>   
Brian or Brion?

-Cary

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/7/1 AGK :
> Um, why are we giving Brion such a hard time? If his message didn't provide
> enough details, then a polite request for clarification would be in order;
> on the contrary, however, some of the replies to his post were just plain
> rude. I do miss the days when we all played nice.

I was already annoyed at him because of his nonsensical comments in
the thread he was referencing, so that may have resulted in my
original reply being a little more harsh than it would usually have
been. I stand by everything I said, though.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:59 PM, AGK wrote:
> Um, why are we giving Brion such a hard time?

He posted without enough context, got defensive when that was pointed
out, then started snide remarks about developers not consulting the
community and therefore making bad decisions. Since you asked.

Now, enough meta-thread?

Steve

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[AGK]

>
> Brian, not Brion. :-)


Oops - I misread.

My comment stands. ;)

AGK
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Peter Coombe]

2009/7/1 Carcharoth :
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:59 AM, AGK wrote:
>> Um, why are we giving Brion such a hard time?
>
> 
>
> Brian, not Brion. :-)
>

I think people are giving *Brian* an unfairly hard time because he is
giving *Brion* (and the other "techies") an unfairly hard time. :-)

Pete / the wub

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Carcharoth]

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 10:59 AM, AGK wrote:
> Um, why are we giving Brion such a hard time?



Brian, not Brion. :-)

Carcharoth

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[AGK]

Um, why are we giving Brion such a hard time? If his message didn't provide
enough details, then a polite request for clarification would be in order;
on the contrary, however, some of the replies to his post were just plain
rude. I do miss the days when we all played nice.
AGK
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[stevertigo]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Brian  wrote:

The fact that the "techies" do not actively seek out community input
> is why we ended up with ParserFunctions. Furthermore these changes are
> supposed to be 'community' decisions. The 'techies' are also not the
> people who edit Wikipedia articles the most. They write code, fix
> servers etc...


You are not actually correct. Things develop the way they do because they
arise as the natural next step. All things improve incrementally, and in
accord with available tools and available understanding. You're too young to
remember what CamelCase is aren't you?

More technically minded
> folks believe that they can sit down and powwow about the technically best
> solution to a problem and can't even imagine what sort of input the
> community could possibly provide. It's totally backwards. The conversation
> should start on WikiEN-l, not wikitech-l. You have to first adequately
> characterize a problem before you start implementing solutions.


While you are certainly right about this idea that techs can get stuck in
certain places that non-tech insights could help with, you are wrong about
certain other things. The facts are: They deal with a lot already, they know
the work involved for any request, they understand the concepts well enough
to know what works and what doesn't, they can reconceptualize ideas and
solutions in ways that the rest of us cannot (seen this a dozen times here),
and they know very well where the tipping point is when things need to get
to the next step.

If there's a technical idea that the tech and general communities need to
interface about, write it up in detail on the meta wiki, and give us a link.
[[meta:New parser language]] or [[meta:New backend scripting language]]
might work.

-Stevertigo


PS: Other comments and responses:

The title says it all - MediaWiki is getting a new programming language.
>

What does that even mean? That everything in PHP code will be rewritten in
Python? Context for non-techies means something you may not yet understand.


It was wholly sufficient.


Your initial message, unlike perhaps your typical coded program, was neither
wholly sufficient nor actually sufficient. "Template parser functions" for
example, as Tom said, would have provided context.

I assume, having signed up to this list, that you understand what
> wikitech-l is and where it is located
>

1) Dont assume anything. 2) Always provide a link. 3) "Location" does not by
itself or in context indicate any relevance. 4) Terseness of the type you
provide does not facilitate *any understanding.
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

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

[Steve Bennett]

Guys, please cool it. This thread is sucking.

___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l