Dennis Benzinger, 03.03.2009: > > Hi! > > Am 03.03.2009 06:40, James Vega schrieb: > > [...] > >> 2) Vim compiled with the --disable-multibyte configure option cannot use > >> UTF-8, or any other multibyte encoding; in fact it doesn't even accept > >> the 'encoding' option as valid. > > > > Is there a reason to allow building Vim without multibyte support? > > Always having multibyte support would make the code simpler/smaller. > > It would make the code smaller but compiling without multibyte support > probably makes the resulting binary smaller. That can make a big > difference for users on resource constrained systems.
What do you mean exactly with "resource constrained systems"? On an old PC, Vim with multibyte should still run fast. On embedded devices people normally use vi from the busybox package. Development is not done on this devices, mostly just editing config files. No need for a featureful editor like Vim. But now that multibyte support is optional and people are using versions without it, it should of course not be thrown out unnecessarily. Markus --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
