On Tuesday, January 14, 2014 4:10:04 PM UTC-6, kans wrote: > Ultimately, we gave up for a few reasons: > > 1. A large percent of the Vim community was outright hostile to the idea.
I don't remember that at all! I think a lot of people liked the idea in general, but didn't like the idea of an uninterruptable task that would potentially take over Vim every 100 milliseconds or something. I think you were well on the way to fixing that. There was pretty universal dislike for the idea of any "official" runtime plugin using the timed events, I think. People like their "out of the box" Vim to be very predictable. > 2. Bram was disinterested If I recall, Bram wanted to see tests. And the crashes fixed. > 3. Vim was unstable with the patch (segfaults outside of the patched code) AND > 4. The Vim code base is abysmal. > Yeah that's a problem, and the complexity of the patch made it hard to solve. So for this sort of thing, simpler is probably better, even if not as fully featured. -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
