I cant believe users on legacy phones (phones from say 2010-ish era) would be writing new content on wikipedia actively. I dont care if you have the newest iphone, you still dont write anything, you just read. For those 0.00001% of users who actually create new content they most def are not using a phone to do this.
> "For me PHP sits in the middle as a poor language, and still slow compared to any compiled languages." No assumptions whatsoever.
Its not an assumption. PHP is slower than a compiled langauge. simple and easy. Need speed? Dont do it in a compiled language. Period.
Well, actually i made zero assumptions. Theres tonnes of markdown editors that work in the browser in real time. I assume the wiki syntax is not that much "heavier" to work with, if it is its another lol for the wiki team.
And by PHP i mean if this rewrite is done partly because of speed, why not build the parser in a compiled language? Its just silly that you have to work with PHP as its one of the worst languages out there in terms of dx and features.
I assume its 2020 where clients are "fast enough" to handle a syntax transformation like markdown -> HTML
Why? The editor needs a frontend in javascript anyways, so why mot handle this all in real time on the client?
Now they rewrote in PHP, thats probably one of the worst languages out there, and why not rewrite in something compiled if speed was the main reason for a rewrite?
For me PHP sits in the middle as a poor language, and still slow compared to any compiled languages. Also i would want to see some wasm vs php benchmarks they did before starting with php.
> "For me PHP sits in the middle as a poor language, and still slow compared to any compiled languages." No assumptions whatsoever.
Its not an assumption. PHP is slower than a compiled langauge. simple and easy. Need speed? Dont do it in a compiled language. Period.