On Do, 13 Jun 2019, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> We could add v:longversion or v:versionlong, with:
>
> major version (one digit)
> minor version (two digits)
> patchlevel (four digits)
We already have v:version
Why not just add a simple v:patchlevel which contains the last patch
included?
I am not sure if we actually need this, considering that there exist Vim
version, that leave out just a single patch in between, so even when
checking for the existence of 8.1.1152, that does not mean that the Vim
used does support all the features that have been added in the previous
1151 patches.
I think a better way is to check for the existence of the feature to be
used using has()/exists(), etc.
Best,
Christian
--
So geht es oft mit einer Unterhaltung: Nach einer Weile vergeblicher
Auseinandersetzung merkt man, daß man gar nicht von derselben Sache
gesprochen hat.
-- André Gide
--
--
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].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_dev/20190614075608.GC23877%40256bit.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
