Difference between revisions of "Talk:TightList"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Use cases) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
When is it appropriate to use TightList? Some examples of situations where performances or reliability improve noticeably by using it would be helpful. I don't have enough knowledge to understand this myself. --[[User:Opensource Obscure|oobscure]] 03:43, 4 April 2011 (PDT) | When is it appropriate to use TightList? Some examples of situations where performances or reliability improve noticeably by using it would be helpful. I don't have enough knowledge to understand this myself. --[[User:Opensource Obscure|oobscure]] 03:43, 4 April 2011 (PDT) | ||
:The two main benefits are (assuming it can generate a unique separator): You can nest lists safely and you don't need to worry about user input input trashing your data. The advantage over a secret multi-character separator is that lists can be safely nested and it doesn't use multiple characters as it's separator (which is why it's got "Tight" in the name). -- '''[[User:Strife_Onizuka|Strife]]''' <sup><small>([[User talk:Strife_Onizuka|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Strife_Onizuka|contribs]])</small></sup> 19:44, 30 November 2015 (PST) | |||
Latest revision as of 20:44, 30 November 2015
Use cases
When is it appropriate to use TightList? Some examples of situations where performances or reliability improve noticeably by using it would be helpful. I don't have enough knowledge to understand this myself. --oobscure 03:43, 4 April 2011 (PDT)
- The two main benefits are (assuming it can generate a unique separator): You can nest lists safely and you don't need to worry about user input input trashing your data. The advantage over a secret multi-character separator is that lists can be safely nested and it doesn't use multiple characters as it's separator (which is why it's got "Tight" in the name). -- Strife (talk|contribs) 19:44, 30 November 2015 (PST)