I'm not sure about this change, but this can only be merged in 6.1 anyway as this is a behavior change and not a bug fix (we always consider performance improvements as a new feature).

Ok for 6.1.

The question to answer before merging this PR is: is it expected to have twig templates that does not have the.twig extension?

The alternative in my code is to decorate the iterator and filter each template name.

class TemplateIteratorimplements \IteratorAggregate{publicfunction__construct(privateiterable$iterator) {}publicfunctiongetIterator():\Generator    {foreach ($this->iteratoras$filename) {if (str_ends_with($filename,'.twig')) {yield$filename;            }        }    }}

And use a compiler pass to inject the decorator in the cache warmer.

class TemplateIteratorPassimplements CompilerPassInterface{publicfunctionprocess(ContainerBuilder$container)    {$warmer =$container->getDefinition('twig.template_cache_warmer');$iterator =$container->register(TemplateIterator::class, TemplateIterator::class)->addArgument($warmer->getArgument(1));$warmer->setArgument(1,$iterator);    }}

Ok for 6.1.

The question to answer before merging this PR is: is it expected to have twig templates that does not have the.twig extension?

I think that this is indeed a great question. And the answer is: you can have templates with another extension. It's probably not widespread but nothing forbids it.

I added an option to theTwigBundle,the plan is to change its default value in 7.0:

twig:file_name_pattern:"*.twig"

The majority of projects having only*.twig files in the template directories, they will not have the deprecation notice and not need to update their configuration.

For projects that mix file extensions (like mine), the deprecation notice will be triggered and it will be easy to solve by adding the config.

Unfortunately, the deprecation is not reported in logs when runningbin/console cache:warmup. And there is very few chances the cache is warmed in tests. I've removed the deprecation to simply add the option. Updating the default value in 7.0 could be part of an other PR.

Ok for 6.1.
The question to answer before merging this PR is: is it expected to have twig templates that does not have the.twig extension?

I think that this is indeed a great question. And the answer is: you can have templates with another extension. It's probably not widespread but nothing forbids it.

In Symfony WebProfilerBundle itself, all svg are included as templates withinclude tag.

Zurb templates uses thesource() function correctly.

See#45858

For the record and to not miss something in previous discussions:

• Should TemplateIterator return only template files #28282
• [TwigBundle] Cache Warmer node_modules bug fixed #34321
• [TwigBundle] TemplateCacheWarmer processes non-template files #34142
• [TwigBundle] Allow to exclude files and directories on cache warmup #34416
• [Twig] Allow filtering for file extensions in template paths #41950

Thanks@yceruto. This proves this issue is common. Your PR was almost the same, with excluded directories in addition.

@fabpotpresented the argument thattemplates directory is for templates only, but experience shows that grouping files by their type is not optimal for maintenance. A twig loader namespace can target a directory with severaltemplates directories.

Thank you@GromNaN.