[development] Move all core modules into their own directories.
vlado at dikini.net
Thu May 4 16:15:22 UTC 2006
On Thu, 2006-05-04 at 17:49 +0200, Dries Buytaert wrote:
> > Indeed, that is exactly why I suggest creating it as a completely separate
> > engine. Though as I think on it, the current setup doesn't support running the
> > same theme with multiple engines, that I'm aware of. I'm not actually sure.
> The point of my original e-mail is that for such a system to be
> successful, it needs to be default. If theme_ functions remain the
> default fallback mechanism, we don't get the full advantage (eg. the
> modules and memory footprint won't go down) making it a lot less
> attractive. In fact, things would get worse, as we'd need to
> duplicate the theme_ functions as stand-alone templates (eg. creating
> maintenance overhead).
Hmm, you are right that having lots of files creates a different kind
of maintenance problems. The pros, are all (or most) design related and
the fact that php doesn't need to compile and keep in memory unused
The cons, load/search times might increase. Maybe the maintenance
Duplication will be a bad thing in any case.
But again, the current theme_ functions are hard(ish) to maintain.
Remember how long it took to get rid of the various accessibility and
xhtml compatibity annoyances.
If we have a robust caching solution, that essentially replicates the
current fallback layout, for example something like the engine Earl
suggests, we can go forward in both cases. My concern with that is
that it requires an extra step.
Another option is to go for a slow default. Weighted engines, with one
of them a default. It could be the pure php thing, with only
one .template file, or similar. And allow for custom speedups and
More information about the development