--- "A.J.Mechelynck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David Thompson wrote:
> > I've been playing with ':vimshell' command from
> > 
> >  http://www.wana.at/vimshell/
> > 
> > and was wondering what the current opinion is
> > about officially adding a shell feature into vim.
> > 
> > Please please, Bram, can you add this to vim?
> > 
> > (*ducks for cover*)
> 
> I think you're right to duck for cover: AFAIK, Bram's standing on that matter 
> has not changed for years and is not going to change overnight: see ":help 
> design-not".

Yeah, I recall some of that history.

But Vim windows are a viewport onto a buffer, and just because
the buffer is being filled with text from shell commands, and I
can input commands into that buffer that are executed by a shell,
well ...

It just seems like vim is becoming extremely powerful and
customizable enough that *it should be able* to handle the
simple thought extension that a window is a viewport onto
a shell (or debugger) session, kinda like the thought process
of what this vimshell patch tries to do.

Besides, Bram's argument is antiquated.  Vim has become bloated
to the point of interfacing with everything else under the sun,
such as perl, python, c-scope ... and, mind you, there exists
feature.h which can DISABLE these cool bloated things which
are pet projects and wonderful features for their believers.

So, why not interface vim with a shell?  Then, why not add a
#define to feature.h to disable this feature?  It seems this
argument of "pinciple" is becoming abused.  For those who
spend all day interfacing to perl, python, cscope, etc, it
is a Good Thing for vim to interface to their environment.

I see no difference in this argument in why the shell and
the debugger don't qualify for such interfaces.

(*runs for cover, much faster than before*)

--
David

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Reply via email to