On 26-Feb-09 4:21, Bram Moolenaar wrote: > Ingo Karkat wrote: > >> On 25-Feb-09 6:25, Tony Mechelynck wrote: >>> Bug? Seems so to me. even two of them (but both related to the 'keymap' >>> option). >>> >>> The one is in menu.vim (Last change: 2008 Aug 22): at lines 365 and 377 >>> it uses ":set" rather than ":setlocal", which sets the keymap for _all_ >>> future new buffers, not only the current one. >>> >>> ... >> Just by opening menu.vim (with folding of if..endif enabled, cp. >> http://vim.wikia.com/wiki/Syntax_folding_of_Vim_scripts), I found another >> bug: >> There's a missing 'endif' between lines 140-141: >> >> 138 func! s:FnameEscape(fname) >> 139 if exists('*fnameescape') >> 140 return fnameescape(a:fname) >> 141 return escape(a:fname, " \t\n*?[{`$\\%#'\"|!<") >> 142 endfunc >> >> I'm not sure what the version support policy for runtime files is; in >> case they now only need to support VIM 7.2, one could get rid of this >> wrapper around fnameescape() completely?! > > We can get rid of the wrapper as soon as people who run an older Vim but > do fetch the latest runtime files upgrade to a newer Vim. It's hard to > say when that happens. And the workaround is easy, so there is no push > to removing it.
IMO, it's unlikely that people do that, and that fact that this bug was found by a code review, not by people complaining, supports this. I think that people either rely on their (Linux) distribution or (Windows) installable package to update VIM, or they compile themselves (the latest VIM version), and then typically also follow the runtime updates closely. When someone has the system permissions to update the runtime files, why would they stick with an outdated VIM version? I respect your opinion, but I think the policy that Tony has outlined is worth considering, as it simplifies the source code and eases maintenance and testing (if that is done at all for older versions ;-). Being an avid vimscript writer myself, I know how difficult it is to balance backwards compatibility (up to VIM 7.0? or even 6.4 or 6.0?) with use of the latest features. We're all interested in a stable runtime, and that is best achieved with a simple and straightforward implementation. -- regards, ingo -- -- Ingo Karkat -- /^-- /^-- /^-- /^-- /^-- /^-- http://ingo-karkat.de/ -- --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
