Thread:Deadcoder/@comment-5590118-20150913154725

In response to this thread.

First of all I suggest familiarizing yourself with the reasons as to why Lua was "ported" to MediaWiki (I use ported loosely because the implementation is more of a bridge between MediaWiki and the Lua interpreter).

Secondly, you need to ask yourself this question, "Why would the language I use to generate content matter to a search engine?". If you come up with anything more than it doesn't you should take a refresher course on what SEO is and how it works.

To a search engine what generates the content does not matter, it's what the content is that matters. A search engine could not care less if you used ALGOL or Turbo PASCAL to create the page just so long as it can output a readable page.

Lastly, why bride some of these languages to MediaWiki? Why would MediaWiki need a bridge to CoffeeScript when you can just compile down the CoffeeScript and give the JavaScript output to MediaWiki to serve? Why bridge Common Lisp? What benefit does it have over Lua? It's certainly not easier to use/learn and you'd need to do a lot of tests to even see if it yielded a performance boost. And still, after all of that you need to see if the microsecond boost in speed is worth using it over Lua.

Now, I am by no means saying that you shouldn't do these things, but I am questioning why you would.

As for a diverse programming language and SEO, no, no it does not effect SEO at all, though it does considerably increase the complexity of any given system.

Lemme know what you think of this. I'd love to hear back from you. 