Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Module:Break

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: delete . ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:47, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Module:Break[edit]

(Time stamp for bot to properly relist.) Galobtter (talk) 16:56, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No need for a separate module for this function; this is redundant to Module:String; {{break}} could be implemented as {{#invoke:String|rep|<br/>|{{{1|1}}}}}, which would be identical with the exception of error handling. {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 17:14, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is premature. Please deal with the "with the exception of" stuff first, presumably at Template talk:Break. The current code limits usage to five breaks, possibly to avoid confusion from careless edits which insert a thousand or so breaks. A talk page discussion to decide that is not wanted should occur first. Module:Break does not need to use mw.ustring but is otherwise simple and perfect. MfD is not the place to discuss the replacement or error handling; that should happen first. Johnuniq (talk) 22:13, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The current code limits usage to five breaks, possibly to avoid confusion from careless edits which insert a thousand or so breaks isn't true. {{break|10}} →

[1], which clearly contains ten line breaks. I don't see why its a good idea to silently treat bogus values like {{break|qqq}} or {{break|-1}} as requesting 1 break, which is the only thing that would change. {the former example would error, the latter example would output nothing) {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 23:47, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I was going on the docs at Template:Break which imply a limit of 5. Either the docs need an update or the module needs to be fixed. I don't think an MfD is the best place to discuss what should be done. Do you know if the module is used anywhere other than from the template? Assuming the module is not used anywhere else, the best plan would be to fix the template so it does not need the module, then MfD the module. Johnuniq (talk) 04:03, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, the module is only used on the template, its sandbox, and its testcases {{repeat|p|3}}ery (talk) 12:29, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (talk) 16:56, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.