Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Template talk:list helper. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Template talk:list helper, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Template talk:list helper in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Template talk:list helper you have here. The definition of the word Template talk:list helper will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTemplate talk:list helper, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
RFD
Latest comment: 11 years ago16 comments10 people in discussion
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
This is the "old" helper template... the slow and complex one. It hasn't been orphaned completely yet, but most uses have been transferred to the new User:CodeCat/list helper template. So this can't be deleted yet. However, if it does fail deletion, I'm hoping that others will help with converting the last 80 or so templates that still use it: . Once deleted, User:CodeCat/list helper will be moved over to replace it. —CodeCat23:23, 24 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Delete, and reject the idea that we should wait for Lua or Scribunto or any of the other updates we've been promised which haven't materialised on time, and that we shouldn't use the infrastructure we already have in place (]) to improve things in the meantime. - -sche(discuss)01:28, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
I believe they have a developer assigned exclusively to getting Lua and Scribunto up and running on en.Wiktionary. What was his name... oh, I remember now: Godot... Chuck Entz (talk) 05:35, 25 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
I think it's an overwhelming delete. So this fails. Yay! But it still has about 70 transclusions in the Template namespace, which will need to be replaced. —CodeCat15:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
It does, actually. It doesn't create a link to the words listed under list= or hypernym=, it treats it as normal text. So you can just put something like "{{l-self|en|aleph}}/{{l-self|en|alef}}" as one of the items. The same works for hypernyms as well. —CodeCat17:02, 6 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
With Lua, the template would have to be completely redone anyway, so there is no value in keeping it in its current form. —CodeCat18:51, 13 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
FWIW, I voted "delete" because I disagreed with your statement that "the template aids creation of new list templates", not because of performance considerations. No matter how well this template might someday perform, I still think we're better off without it. —RuakhTALK01:01, 17 February 2013 (UTC)Reply
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
It seems we have agreed to delete this template and replace it with CodeCat's version (or / in addition with my own two versions). Or haven't we? Is the template going to be deleted? --Pereru (talk) 10:07, 6 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Lua has changed a lot of things. The problem with the old list helper was that it contained a lot of intricate code that was necessary because of how templates work. In particular, templates don't support loops, so each parameter out of 60 (!) had to be addressed individually. Lua on the other hand supports loops, so it could easily iterate over all the parameters individually with only a small amount of code. Another advantage is that Lua can do string operations, so it would be possible to enter a list item with alternatives, like "Antarctic Ocean/Southern Ocean", and the Lua module could be written so that it automatically splits where the slash is. On the other hand, the new list template as it is now is rather simple and straightforward, and flexible at the same time, so it may not really be necessary to change much about how it works for now. —CodeCat13:39, 10 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
We could even have the template split by commas, so that it wouldn't require any template-y stuff at all. It might even be faster than using the l template repeatedly like in CodeCat/list helper. --Yair rand (talk) 23:46, 10 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
It is probably better to let Lua do the linking, yes. But we can still decide on whether to split the words by passing multiple parameters, or split them with commas and let Lua split it. I don't know which would be faster. —CodeCat01:03, 11 March 2013 (UTC)Reply