[02:18:03] What's the difference between Wikifunctions and the proposal to centralize modules across wikis? [05:59:15] It may be possible one day to achieve the latter with the former [10:46:03] yeah, that's what I was thinking [10:50:19] And then kind of similarly, I was questioning @thadguidry 's proposal about allowing functions to be written in multiple languages. Allowing that seems to be kind of bad because it means only people who know the programming language the function is written in can improve it and it really fragments the community. Shouldn't we just choose one language(s) to make all functions with? And relating to modules, could this jus [11:13:02] from a volunteer point of view, Lua should be given an insane amount of love because it's the only way we can help people to transform templates into Lua [11:13:19] but I wouldn't mind functions to be written also in, say, Python [11:13:52] maybe a function for making bots run would be as much as useful to a volunteer [11:14:05] (just thinking out loud) [11:59:22] I thought functions were independent of any programming language anyway [12:01:19] and it's always true that only people who know a programming language can improve code written in it, whether you have a single language or not [14:51:07] Just as some human languages are concise or optimized for their environments or applied areas like having a single word for "cut the tree and make firewood from it", so do some programming languages have concise or standardized libraries for making easy work in particular areas of computational science. Just as Wikipedia does not say "all articles must be written in English". Having a polyglot experience expands capab [14:55:35] https://www.graalvm.org/22.0/reference-manual/polyglot-programming/ [15:14:29] My hope for the future would be that eventually, Wikifunctions becomes approachable (textual and visual) for many more folks regardless of background. Perhaps like https://github.com/enso-org/enso