Module talk:arguments

RFDO discussion: December 2013–June 2015
Along with Module:math. Imported by User:Mxn for the sake of having a two-line rounding function (which does not even depend on most of this code) for archive navigation module. I doubt we will ever need this in the dictionary proper. Not nominating Module:yesno, but we seem to have managed without it until now, so it might go as well. Keφr 14:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to say keep, but remove what we don't really need. I think it would be nice to be able to avoid the constant "if x == "" then x = nil end" on all parameters, it does get tedious. I've thought of writing a module like this before. There's also something else I've wanted to add, which is checking arguments for usage, and a global category tracking system.
 * Checking arguments for usage would mean that each argument that gets used by the module is marked "used", and at the end if any arguments remain unused, this adds a category or error or something like that. That would allow us to find out easily which pages are using modules with mis-typed parameter names, or parameters that aren't actually recognised or supported by the template.
 * Tracking categories globally would make it much easier for any module to add tracking categories and such. In templates, you can just put a category anywhere and it works, but in modules you can't do that, which is a limitation. 14:21, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I cannot imagine why we would ever write something that would require Module:math. It mostly wraps basic mathematical functions so that templates can use them: we would probably do most of the work inside modules, making the wrappers unnecessary.
 * As for Module:arguments… I am unsure what that thing actually does. Looks like some kind of input sanitisation. For now I would prefer to do it directly in the modules which receive a frame. I actually do have one idea for a module for tracking argument usage, categories and errors, but this module would not be of much help there. Keφr 18:38, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Some at the WMF apparently want to integrate this… thing into Scribunto. Either way, we need not keep it here. — Keφr 11:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Neither of the nominated modules has found any use in more than a year. CodeCat, your stance now? — Keφr 18:30, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it might as well be deleted. I am considering making a module that fulfills a similar purpose, but I'd be rewriting it from scratch. —CodeCat 18:32, 12 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Kept, no consensus to delete, luckily. --Type56op9 (talk) 23:01, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

RFDO discussion: April–May 2017
Along with Module:math. They were nominated for deletion by Kephir and CodeCat seemed to have some reason to keep them that was unclear to me. A great deal more time has passed and neither she, nor anyone else, has used either of these modules, and for good reason — we don't need them. See Module talk:arguments for the last deletion debate, which was closed as no consensus. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:15, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. We now have Module:parameters. —CodeCat 20:16, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete for it is unused and undocumented. --Dixtosa (talk) 23:37, 8 April 2017 (UTC)


 * RFD failed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:48, 26 May 2017 (UTC)