Content deleted Content added
Fred Gandt (talk | contribs) replies: prefer "combined" and thank you Aidan |
|||
Line 92:
:For the sake of ease in handling the code, and the fact I'd rather keep those options as just "truthy" checks instead of exact == checks (the only reason its <code>=1</code> in the doc is probably because its shorter than typing <code>=true</code>), does something like a seperate <code>nowikiplus</code> or <code>combined</code> option sound better? I'll probably have to standardise the module a little to make adding this not mean pasting the same code in 5 different functions, but it should be doable (I'll just have to think about how to lay it out in the output). [[User:Aidan9382|Aidan9382]] <sub>([[User talk:Aidan9382|talk]])</sub> 09:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
::Sounds good to me! Definitely think of the maintainability of the code ahead of the minor convenience of only having one option to consider. Personally; I think <code>combined</code> is better. Thank you for your consideration 😊 <code style="background:#DFF;white-space:pre">[[User:Fred Gandt|Fred Gandt]] · [[User talk:Fred Gandt|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Fred Gandt|contribs]]</code> 09:46, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
:::{{ping|Fred Gandt}} I've managed to get some initial work done on this (currently got the main functions <code>preprocess_equals(_many)</code> and <code>preprocess_equals_preprocess(_many)</code> running under the new system idea in the sandbox) - Does the format I've given seen fine in your testcases? I don't want to start working on the more complicated to convert functions unless it's all working fine. You can test these by changing <code>require('Module:UnitTests')</code> to <code>require('Module:UnitTests/sandbox')</code> and specifying <code>combined</code> instead of <code>nowiki</code>. [[User:Aidan9382|Aidan9382]] <sub>([[User talk:Aidan9382|talk]])</sub> 14:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
== Present failed tests together at the top ==
| |||