Early Testing for v5.3.0-prerelease

6

Some documentation questions:

  1. Macro Pitfalls includes the following on performance of global macros:

Global Macro Definitions defined with the SystemTag: $:/tags/Macro suffer from poor performance because every macro has to be parsed regardless of whether it is actually used.

Furthermore, the way that definitions are imported means that updating a tiddler tagged SystemTag: $:/tags/Macro will cause the entire page to be refreshed.

Since the tiddler is contrasting macros with procedures/functions/custom widgets, this leads me to assume that the new macro alternatives do not have the same performance implications and/or are not imported in the same way.

  • Is this true? I can’t find anything explicitly discussing the performance of the new 5.3.0 features.
  • However, Procedure Definitions does explicitly mention the $:/tags/Macro tag as a means of creating for creating global procedures.
  • Are procedures handled differently than macros with the same tag, or are the docs only suggesting that we should be using the $:/tags/Macro/View and $:/tags/Macro/View/Body tags instead, and thus cutting down on the truly “global”?
  1. Also on Procedure Definitions—this seems like it’s probably just a copy-paste error:

image
image732×311 10.1 KB

  • I assume the tiddler should be referring to “procedures” and using \procedure instead.
  1. Global functions and custom widgets?
  • My understanding is that both can also be made global with the $:/tags/Macro tag, but this isn’t explicitly mentioned in the documentation. The Custom Widgets tiddler does explain that custom widgets are a special kind of procedure, so perhaps it goes without saying, but I think it ought to be mentioned on the Functions tiddler, at least.
  1. Checking my understanding of functions…
  • Since \function my-function is a shortcut for defining my-function with a <$set> widget (and, potentially, a narrower scope), I’d assume that a function using a TextReference (like \function my-function(parameter:"2") [<parameter>multiply[1.5]add{!!test}]) would destroy and re-render the entire contents of the tiddler in which it appeared if the value of the “test” field changes. This seems to be borne out in my testing.
  • Is there any work-around for this? Or does best practice simply advise against defining functions that incorporate TextReferences (and, I imagine, against making any of them global?)

Edit for posterity: Not a \function issue; I’d misdiagnosed an unrelated issue with text-input widgets, now fixed.