User talk:ImplSearchBot: Difference between revisions
→Need special case for nested pages: ISB is done. I will not be doing direct development on MCS.
m (fix links) |
(→Need special case for nested pages: ISB is done. I will not be doing direct development on MCS.) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 30:
* Suggestion: Under the [[Reports: Tasks not implemented in Common Lisp#Not Considered|Not Considered]] header, link to task pages with an edit link beside (e.g., in parentheses) as is done in the main list. [[User:Tayloj|Tayloj]] 18:40, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
: I actually fixed that in the bot last night, but I missed a step in getting the changes over to the copy of the bot that runs and updates the wiki. I'm doing a manual run now; It should be fixed within about half an hour. --[[User:Short Circuit|Short Circuit]] 18:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
== Need special case for nested pages ==
I'd like to have a special case for large tasks like [[RCBF]] which keep the actual code on nested pages like [[RCBF/Common Lisp]]. Currently, this requires the main page to include the category for each language. In addition, each nested code page also manually includes the category for the particular language. This inflates the count for those languages which solve these nested tasks.
I'd prefer for ImplSearchBot to detect nested solution pages and only count them, so we could omit the language categories from pages which don't have code. (This would also catch a handful of other tasks which mix inline implementations and nested page implementations.) I'd also like for the root pages to just link to the appropriate category, like [[:Category:RCBF]], so we don't have to maintain both the nested solution code and a link to the solution code on the root page. --[[User:IanOsgood|IanOsgood]] 19:56, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
: ImplSearchBot [[Rosetta Code:Village Pump/ImplSearchBot Fate and Replacement|has been dead for three months, now]]. Edit [[Template:Unimpl_Page]] to add/remove features. I will not be adding special cases to the MultiCategorySearch code, because that road leads to the maintenance headaches that led to ISB sucking up the ''vast'' majority of the time I had available to spend on RC this year. The only practical alternative I can think of is to change MCS's syntax to support arbitrary SELECT/subselect queries and subqueries, and that opens up a nasty potential DOS attack if it's not done very carefully. I have a large number of other backlogged things I need to focus on before i consider it. Poke [[User:Opticron|Opticron]] if you'd like to take over further development of it; I think he's sick of it. I brought up various options at various times to deal with RCBF and friends several times, but since nobody commented further or took further action, we have what we have until someone provides something better. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 20:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
| |||