Thread:User talk:CodeCat/l/xx templates/reply (2)

I've already tested that (for different languages and scripts). For a page with 1000 linking templates it took almost 12s for old version of l, almost 7s for Luacized l (current version), and almost 5s for l/xx to be loaded. In practice, the number of l templates are usually much less then that, so I think the difference is not significant or, at best, is not enough to outweighs the disadvantages.

The disadvantages are that the features and templates wouldn't be centralized if we continue using them, and that l/xx has much less features than l.