Template talk:Code

Improve Template:Code with revision 301901 (and also decide what it wants to be)

This concerns revision 301901 for Template:Code and also the template in general.

As of revision 302080, Template:Code has regressed from its Wikipedia counterpart significantly:

• Text is wrapped in <kbd> instead of <syntaxhighlight>

• using <kbd> to denote computer code is semantically incorrect and will throw surprises at user-agents that expect otherwise;

• {{{style}}} has been co-opted for pre-determined CSS styles instead of allowing editors to specify arbitrary CSS styles

• this is inconsistent with Template:Pre by the same maintainer and with the other in-house Wikipedia imports
• this is another surprise to editors
• editors can no longer specify arbitrary CSS styles without either a) using #tag:, b) using <code>, or c) using some nasty syntax hacks

• spurious parameters attempt to solve the inability to provide arbitrary CSS styles with another layer of unnecessary and obscure abstraction

• e.g., {{{select=1}}} results in identical behaviour to {{{style="user-select: all"}}}

• this appears to be a recurring element in other templates by the same maintainer
• editors must now remember a new set of arbitrary integer-key mappings
• existing values are fragile; changes to valid values will propagate across all invocations until someone fixes them

• e.g., {{{color}}} and {{{bg}}} abstract away CSS color and background-color

• preset CSS styles have inconsistent styling and can reflow the page if changed

• see: padding, border

Given that this Wiki has pitiful tooling for mass-updates, a template rewrite must:

• maintain backwards-compatibility with previous invocations; and
• produce correct backwards-compatible output

while providing new functionality. The code paths for this backwards-compatibility will probably persist until all old invocations are sanitized.

I already have a rewrite (revision 301901) that satisfied these complaints but was reverted almost immediately; changing the internal tag from <syntaxhighlight> to <code> will allow the template from this revision to produce correct output.

I would recommend replacing the current incarnation of Template:Code with a patched revision 301901, pending review.

On the other hand, the site administrators have made dubious changes to the site-wide CSS that revert the Vector skin styles. <code> is effectively indistinguishable from <kbd>; the number of template changes with <kbd> committed where <code> should be is non-zero. Perhaps Template:Code would better serve as a wrapper for <code> with sane CSS defaults (I suppose, as it is now), but maintain compatibility with syntax given by other Wikipedia ports.

idk :3 — 結衣 (talk) 22:32, 29 Apr 2023 (UTC)

Recent edits make text with unspecified language harder to read

The older method, which was basically {{mono}} with a background, was easier to read. It's nice having the new syntaxhighlight alias, but it's come at the cost of the legibility of the regular languageless text.
— SirYodaJedi (talk) 11:45, 20 October 2025 (PDT)

I don't understand what you're talking about. The background in the new version remains the same (it uses a slightly darker version of the background applied to the <code> tag by the site's styles). The main change is the removal of presets: unnecessary functionality is not required here. Regarding syntaxhighlight… it was already used in the template before my changes, I just replaced the {{{highlight}}} parameter with a more logical {{{lang}}}, because this value is substituted into the syntaxhighlight attribute, which is called lang.

PS: Don't get me wrong, I just genuinely don't understand the problem. If the new version causes any issues that break the template/page/other templates, please describe them and provide examples. I'll try to fix it as soon as possible. — Max34 (talk) 13:01, 20 October 2025 (PDT)

It looks different. The font is different.

int main() { return 0; }

int main() { return 0; }

int main() { return 0; }

int main() { return 0; }

int main() { return 0; }

Image for comparison, since it may differ between devices:

— SirYodaJedi (talk) 21:39, 20 October 2025 (PDT)

I checked these examples from different places and devices and didn't notice this problem. Perhaps it has something to do with font-family:monospace, monospace;. I tried the font-family:monospace;, see if that helps. — Max34 (talk) 00:24, 21 October 2025 (PDT)