Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-19 Fir de Conversatie Tony Mechelynck
On 11/08/09 11:41, Milan Vancura wrote: [...] I can imagine that something like plugin registration would help here. Same as each plugin has a code part and doc part now, it would contain something like a registration part (a header with metadata), useful for several purposes: better

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-19 Fir de Conversatie Tony Mechelynck
On 10/08/09 06:22, ron wrote: [...] 3) Harder: have the ScriptPre autocommand actually be useful.[...] There is no ScriptPre autocommand event. Maybe you mean SourcePre? Beware that it is called for _every_ source command. Maybe even (I haven't tested) when starting on your vimrc... Best

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-18 Fir de Conversatie Tony Mechelynck
On 11/08/09 11:07, Andy Wokula wrote: ron schrieb: Right, I understand that -- and that is the same sort of ugliness I have in my own 'vimrc'. My point isn't that it is currently impossible -- but rather that we have to go through silly steps to suppress what should really not be loaded

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-14 Fir de Conversatie Tom
1) All standard plugins supplied by vim should have a common method of suppressing their loading.  That is, they should all have a common variable name to suppress them.  For example, to suppress plugin x, a variable g:plugin_x_loaded should be set or something. How would this be different

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-13 Fir de Conversatie Matt Wozniski
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 4:42 AM, Dimitar DIMITROV wrote: Hi, I just wanted to support all the complainers. Even if the standard plugins do not slow Vim down, some of them are useless. tohtml for instance produces code which is not compliant with any modern standards. It is a shame to have

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-12 Fir de Conversatie Dimitar DIMITROV
Hi, I just wanted to support all the complainers. Even if the standard plugins do not slow Vim down, some of them are useless. tohtml for instance produces code which is not compliant with any modern standards. It is a shame to have it bundled. Besides, even if I never use it, I would like other

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-11 Fir de Conversatie Andy Wokula
ron schrieb: Right, I understand that -- and that is the same sort of ugliness I have in my own 'vimrc'. My point isn't that it is currently impossible -- but rather that we have to go through silly steps to suppress what should really not be loaded by default in the first place, and that

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-11 Fir de Conversatie Milan Vancura
If automatically loading plugins, use these variables to disable certain of them. ... let g:loaded_getscriptPlugin = 0 getscriptPlugin.vim let g:loaded_gzip = 0gzip.vim let g:loaded_matchparen = 0 matchparen.vim let

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-11 Fir de Conversatie Charles Campbell
ron wrote: [snip] I use plugins for my own code, I don't want to disable them. But I don't want to load a whole bunch of code I never use, either. [snip] Are you aware of the bifurcation of the plugins into a plugin/ directory and an autoload/ directory? The majority of the plugins' code

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-11 Fir de Conversatie ron
I can imagine that something like plugin registration would help here Yes, precisely correct. Thank you, Milan. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message from the vim_dev maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-11 Fir de Conversatie ron
On Aug 11, 4:50 pm, Charles Campbell charles.e.campb...@nasa.gov wrote: Are you aware of the bifurcation of the plugins into a plugin/ directory and an autoload/ directory?   Yes, and I use it in my own plugin system. Nevertheless, the standard plugins are not standard in how they can be

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-10 Fir de Conversatie Lech Lorens
2009/8/10 ron r...@ronware.org: Each suggestion has pros and cons.  The ScriptPre is the only one which would have no effect on existing instalations, so perhaps Bram will prefer it to the others.  I personally prefer the second suggestion, as in that case the user is in complete control over

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-10 Fir de Conversatie ron
I don't want to disable all plugins. I want to disable some plugins, and 'loadplugins' doesn't permit a blacklist or something. On Aug 10, 9:36 am, Lech Lorens lech.lor...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/8/10 ron r...@ronware.org: Each suggestion has pros and cons.  The ScriptPre is the only one

Re: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-10 Fir de Conversatie Gregory Margo
On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 12:06:09AM -0700, ron wrote: I don't want to disable all plugins. I want to disable some plugins, and 'loadplugins' doesn't permit a blacklist or something. There are two possible methods. 1) Set 'noloadplugins' and then explicitly load the individual plugins you

RE: Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-10 Fir de Conversatie John Beckett
Please bottom post on this list. Quote a small (relevant) part of the message you are replying to, and put your text underneath. See the list guidelines: http://groups.google.com/group/vim_use/web/vim-information --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message

Request: suppression of plugins

2009-08-09 Fir de Conversatie ron
There are a number of plugins loaded by vim on startup (in the runtime/ plugins directory). Not everyone wants them to load all the time. In order to suppress their loading, one must generally set a variable specific to that plugin, which can only be known by perusing the plugin itself.