Forum:Switching to the new parser - Update

Forums: Index > Village Dump > Switching to the new parser - Update

Note: This topic has been unedited for 5738 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over.

See also Forum:Switching to the new parser.

We are now switched to the new parser, and some pages are now borked. The usual cause will be templates that have unclosed html tags, so that's what to look for first. Please let us know if you need help (although the author of the template is usually a better person to sort it out!) From a quick look around, it looks as though user pages are most affected. But if you see articles looking strange, please keep in mind that the new parser may be the cause. Thanks -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

YOU KILLED MY USERPAGE! ~ 11:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

You killed Jesus. -- Mitch 12:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Damn it - I thought we were going to get away with that one! Rabbi Techno kvetch Contribs FOXES 12:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

He was over the top already. Also, don't take this remark seriously, Rabbi. It is coming from an Ex Con after all. ~ 12:19, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

You used to be a Conservative? Eek! -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 16:46, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Also, how can we fix everything? I've looked over some of the effected pages (mainly: MINE) but some other pages are there too, and I can't find opened tags. ~ 16:49, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes the tags are switched, for example "<div><center><i>...</div></center></i>" wouldn't function properly anymore. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 17:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

My page is only moderately borked. Hurrah! I, as before, have no idea how it all works! Hurrah! Am I the only one here in that boat? No? Hurrah! Personally, I blame the templates. Hurrah!Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 20:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

my page is fine, but cajek's isn't! someone help him! SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 21:13, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I helped! --UU - natter 15:56, Mar 4

Now, sannse, when you link "some pages" to, say for example, my userpage, you don't by any chance mean thatOH GOD OH FUCKY FUCK QUICK QUICK SOMEONE FIX IT OH GOD - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 01:55, Mar 4

So, bad HTML is the most likely cause of errors. But there are some other changes that might cause errors. For example, the way that some complex parser tags work has changed. The best thing to do is to look for HTML problems first (not forgetting that the errors are often in templates used on the page). Then, if you can't find it, hassle anyone you know who knows HTML and wikimarkup better than you (nah, not going to link some poor guy). Then, if you can't find it, hassle me to find help (Uberfuzzy is on standby to assist where needed). Again I'd suggest that the template author should be the person who knows how to make it work!

Don't forget that you can use Special:ParserDiffTest as a help in finding exactly what's different on a page. A lot of the changes don't mean anything. For example, on this page] the only differences are to class and section titles. But this one shows problems with center and div tags (the last two green sections on the div)

Don't you just love mediawiki upgrades... -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I hate the world at this point. Explain to me like I'm retarted, which I am. I see the differences. Now what? Do I delete everything that is marked in red? Do I cry? Do I go postal? ~ 12:28, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

So for your page, the first problem was that one side had a </span> that the other didn't. That was because Template:EGAoEitDoM was missing a close tag (and was the first template used on your page). All those additions of class="mw-redirect" are ignorable, but there are some other problem tags further down. I've fixed that first one... I'll see how many others I can fix there too -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 15:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

There, you are fixed. Only not in the stray dog kinda way of course -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 15:39, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Bless you heart! ~ 15:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, bless you, Heart, for bringing us Theeeese Dreeeeamsss go on when I close my eyes. --UU - natter 15:46, Mar 4

Oh fuck me. I hate English. ~ 15:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I hate all other languages, including American English, so that balances things out nicely. --UU - natter 15:56, Mar 4

Yeah, so I changed stuff, and my userpage still appears to be fucked up. Anyone know how to ficks? - T.L.B. WotM, UotM, FPrize, AotM, ANotM, PLS, UN:HS, GUN 02:20, Mar 5

Fixed. It was Mr Winkler's fault. I hope he gets some sick. -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 08:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Not sure if this has anything to do with the parser/upgrade

But is the new preview thing meant to utterly bork my tabs like on the picture (they wouldn't work, it'd just highlight the preview wording when clicked)? –—Hv (talk) 4/03 19:16

This wasn't the new parser, it was some code that shouldn't have been active here. Now it isn't. Sorry 'bout that -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 08:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what a "parser" is.

Nor do I really know or care what happened to y'all's userpages. What matters is that MY USERPAGE IS FUCKED UP. Someone please fix it. Thank you. —Sir SysRq (talk) 21:34, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Done: {{AmericanUser}} had some unclosed tags, which fucked everything up. –—Hv (talk) 4/03 21:47

parsers, short for parsnippers, are the little gnomes in your browser that run between HTML tags to produce the proper effect in between. the new parsers are less lazy than the old ones and have mucked up userpages with non-matching tags to force you to fix them. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 22:02, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Oh no! It's Gnome invasion all over again! -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 22:06, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry. They decoded the human gnome a while ago. Now they just have to figure out how to read it. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 22:59, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

God dammit, Hv, how many times are you going to save my ass with code? —Sir SysRq (talk) 23:50, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Spank your ass with a choad? -OptyC Sucks! CUN23:53, 4 Mar

Wank your dick with a toad? -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 19:20, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what was up with the the update. For awhile it did fuck up my userpage. However I discovered a problem was with a user box having improper formating. (They forgot to close the DIV tag in each case) This caused my userpage with Proper HTML formating to get fucked up. IF you do [nobody cares|care]] and you notice your userpage is fucked up, check to find which userbox is fucking it up. (usually it's the one right before everything is screwed up below) Then go to that userbox page and fix it to where the proper tags are closed in the right places. (If that userbox is protected go into the IRC Channel #uncyclopedia or whine at an Admin to fix the problem, If that doesn't work list it for VFD if possible) --Pleb- Sawblade5 ^{( yell | FAQ | I did this )} 06:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Not sure if this has anything to do with the parser/upgrade

Looks like choose tag results are cached now, so multiple calls of a choose/option tag in the same page results in it giving exactly the same thing each time. For example, on Mad Libs. I can see why such a feature might save some processing on other wikis, but we kinda need it the way it was before on uncyclopedia. If you would be so kind. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 23:10, 05 Mar 2009

Yes, this is to do with the parser, and to do with how it very sensibly caches templates that don't have variables. It can't be changed I'm afraid, but the very clever Splarka has come up with a solution. All you need to do is add a fake variable to any template you don't want cached (that is, any with choose in there). So instead of {{verb}} use {{verb|1}}. So yay for Splarka!

Anyone up for a quick botting? -- sannse<staff/> (talk) 19:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

my soup today was rather colder than usual. i think this is because i left it on the counter for longer than i normally do, but i just wanted to be absolutely sure the parser wasn't causing this before i investigate further. thanks! SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 19:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Was it tomato soup? The parser should handle it fine. It does, however, scramble alphabet soup. Mine, for example, looks like gibberish now. Sir Modusoperandi ^Boinc! 19:41, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

well it was actually that newfangled 'number soup', and now that you mention it, i think the parser may have removed all of the numbers except for 0 and 1. SirGerrycheeversGunTalk 19:47, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Voting template

The little voting box that attaches itself to articles on VFH when you link from the nomination page, and also shows on the nomination page itself, is quite missing. Is this a parser-related piece of fallout? Or is it just me? It sure saved time not having to edit the page manually, and its absence probably accounts for the extra-large slowdown VFH is currently experiencing. IronLung 22:47, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

I made some changes to it recently... and it's not missing for me. What browser are you using? Might just change it back if it broke it for some people. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 03:43, 08 Mar 2009

Firefox 3. It's totally goneski, mang, and I haven't updated my browser for freaking ages. Like how the link to an article from the VFH main page used to have that little vfhlink bit in the URL? Yeah that's not there now. IronLung 04:19, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

The vfhlink bit in the url should still be there... as for the box not appearing, try deleting cookies from uncyclopedia, or make sure javascript is on. Can't think of anything else that might be wrong. Does it show when you're logged out? • Spang • ☃ • talk • 06:14, 08 Mar 2009

Oh dear it was just the cookie. Thanks Spang. IronLung 08:16, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

You probably clicked "disable this thing" at one point, which totally disables it until 2038. Or until you clear your cookies. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 01:07, 09 Mar 2009

Template Formatting Issue

I've noticed that the new parser allows formatting tags from a template to extend to the rest of the article. (I.e. an unclosed <center> tag will center the rest of an article.) Is it supposed to do that? I always assumed that the template formatting not applying outside the template was intentional. Right now, unclosed tags can mess up the rest of the article. --Mnb'z 04:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Pretty sure it's always done that, there's templates that start and end tables separately etc. Just fix the templates. • Spang • ☃ • talk • 20:45, 10 Mar 2009

Not always always, not in every case that is, but yes, just fixing the template is the solution to the problem. -Sockpuppet of an unregistered user 20:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)