Convert theme_indentation() to Twig

Looks great, works great:)

possible 80 char limit on the twig docblock but otherwise gorgeous. Patch attached, moved two words down (couldn't widow it).

If you are ok with the formatting, it's good for RTBC from me.

run it again for good measure;)

Manually tested markup of patched and unpatch instances on simplytest me. Confirmed existence of ,,, in both instances. Screen shots attached.

Tested on chrome with Bartik theme

Add testing steps

Manual testing, abusing PHP template while I can:D

rerolled version attached.

Well i just change the status for make sure to test bot is ok with this reroll.

Ignore #18 - bad bot. Queued for retest.

This template isn't used much so I just added the admin menu page to the home page.

Scenario:

Stark
/admin/structure/menu/manage/admin on front page

Did 4 runs, and the numbers were around 1.4%-1.6% wall time variation and the function call difference matched pretty close to the CPU/Wall Time diff.

=== 8.x..8.x compared (51b89dd280f98..51b89eaf4e36e):

ct  : 163,719|163,719|0|0.0%
wt  : 952,799|953,500|701|0.1%
cpu : 881,583|879,318|-2,265|-0.3%
mu  : 16,626,344|16,626,344|0|0.0%
pmu : 17,636,904|17,636,904|0|0.0%.

http://www.lionsad.de/xhprof-kit/xhprof/xhprof_html/?run1=51b89dd280f98&...

=== 8.x..1939102-twig-indentation compared (51b89dd280f98..51b89ec98250c):

ct  : 163,719|166,316|2,597|1.6%
wt  : 952,799|966,616|13,817|1.5%
cpu : 881,583|895,851|14,268|1.6%
mu  : 16,626,344|16,689,616|63,272|0.4%
pmu : 17,636,904|17,691,088|54,184|0.3%

http://www.lionsad.de/xhprof-kit/xhprof/xhprof_html/?run1=51b89dd280f98&...

Add code tags

The indentation works. I replied to a post and the replied text was indented.

This seems to be quite a large regression for such a simple thing... how come?

Not sure why the regression but it seems the function call percentage is mapping very close to the wall time/cpu percentage.

Maybe @Fabianx can help explain?

=== 8.x..8.x compared (51c24fd9b971a..51c2508074568):

ct  : 172,339|172,339|0|0.0%
wt  : 1,168,790|1,169,811|1,021|0.1%
cpu : 1,101,882|1,103,662|1,780|0.2%
mu  : 38,608,488|38,608,488|0|0.0%
pmu : 39,643,968|39,643,968|0|0.0%

http://www.lionsad.de/xhprof-kit/xhprof/xhprof_html/?run1=51c24fd9b971a&...

=== 8.x..1939102-twig-indentation compared (51c24fd9b971a..51c25102ed66d):

ct  : 172,339|174,744|2,405|1.4%
wt  : 1,168,790|1,183,443|14,653|1.3%
cpu : 1,101,882|1,115,003|13,121|1.2%
mu  : 38,608,488|38,669,504|61,016|0.2%
pmu : 39,643,968|39,704,568|60,600|0.2%

http://www.lionsad.de/xhprof-kit/xhprof/xhprof_html/?run1=51c24fd9b971a&...

http://www.lionsad.de/xhprof-kit/xhprof/xhprof_html/?run1=51c24fd9b971a&...

explains it pretty well:

The overhead is:

15 ms

Of that time is spent for:

* 9 ms - Template rendering
* 1.3 ms - Preprocess and process
* 0.5 ms - Attribute:: overhead
* 1.6 ms - function_exists and general theme() function overhead for templates

--

9 + 3.4 = 12.4 ms = ~ 13 ms

The rest is fluctuation. => 1.2% overhead

The template has a rather large overhead, because for loops have some overhead in twig:

* Container, template loading, settings: ~ 4 ms
* Template render: 5 ms

Template render:

* OB, error handling: 2.5 ms
* Template handling: 2.5 ms

Template itself:

* PHP code: 1.3 ms
* loop overhead: 1.2 ms

Given this template is likely not often needed to be overwritten / used only seldomly I opt for:

* Keep theme() function
* Add unused template like field.html.twig for designers to add to their theme

Re-rolled

We should do what @Fabianx suggested in #24 so changing this back to CNW.

Adapted the patch from #26 with the changes suggested in #24.

Thank you @mikl!

Looks like our field.html.twig.

Actually, just to make sure, can we do a manual test that this does indeed get rendered when put into the theme ?

Tested and yes it does work as advertised. Back to RTBC.

Committed c96cedf and pushed to 8.x. Thanks!