l/''xx'' templates

Fragment of a discussion from User talk:CodeCat
Jump to: navigation, search

I don't know. Can you see if the pages in Category:Proto-Slavic appendices are not slower when used with {{l}} instead?

CodeCat13:14, 4 July 2013

I've already tested that (for different languages and scripts). For a page with 1000 linking templates it took almost 12s for old version of l, almost 7s for Luacized l (current version), and almost 5s for l/xx to be loaded. In practice, the number of l templates are usually much less then that, so I think the difference is not significant or, at best, is not enough to outweighs the disadvantages.

The disadvantages are that the features and templates wouldn't be centralized if we continue using them, and that l/xx has much less features than l.

Z13:26, 4 July 2013

The lack of features is the point, though. That's why they are fast. They are optimised for one purpose and nothing else. If you really want to get rid of those templates, I think you need to convince more people than just me. Grease pit would be a good place to go.

CodeCat13:29, 4 July 2013

I know, but I don't want them to be removed/deprecated at the moment, but to remove that section that you added in l's docs which says "l/xx is strongly preferred".

Z13:38, 4 July 2013

I suppose if {{l}} is now faster than it is before, it is not as strongly preferred anymore.

CodeCat13:41, 4 July 2013

Considering all this, do you agree that we should stop categorising every time someone uses {{l|xx|foo}} where {{l/xx}} exists?

Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds20:28, 6 July 2013

Yes, but I think that has already changed with {{l}}'s code being completely replaced by a module. It just takes a while to empty out the category.

CodeCat20:29, 6 July 2013