On 11-Aug-09 6:23, ron wrote:
> Right, I understand that -- and that is the same sort of ugliness I
> have in my own 'vimrc'.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. IMHO, the current plugin load mechanism
works perfectly fine for the vast majority of users.
> 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 there is no consistency
> in how plugins currently work.
The fact that we don't see requests like yours more often seems to suggest that
most users agree with what is loaded by default. Of course, it is perfectly
fine
that you don't want to load the default plugins. Having to put a couple of
statements in your .vimrc to achieve this is more a testament to the
flexibility
of Vim than "silly steps". (Though it would indeed be tempting to have a ':set
dowhatimean' setting to configure Vim just the way I want it ;-) In fact, I'm
even expanding on that idiom to run archived old plugin versions when running
on
outdated Vim versions, a la:
if v:version < 602
" VIM 6.0, 6.1
let g:loaded_align = 1
let g:loaded_alignmaps = 1
runtime plugin/genutils.vim600
runtime plugin/mru.vim600
elseif v:version < 603
" VIM 6.2
runtime plugin/genutils.vim602
let g:loaded_greputils = 1
...
This doesn't look silly to me. My only gripe is when a plugin doesn't yet have
a
g:loaded_... inclusion guard, but then I simply mail the author and ask him to
add one.
-- 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
