On Sat, 08 Jun 2013 23:20:22 +0200 Marc Weber <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have written up a small list: > http://vim-wiki.mawercer.de/wiki/vim-development/breaking-with-the-past.html I looked at that list, and speaking for myself, not one of those features would be worth a huge amount of coding/recoding, with the resulting bugs and possible loss of existing features. > But its not long enough to to justify a fork. Fixing is still the way > to go IMHO. I'd prefer a fork to trying to do any of those things in the existing Vim, if those things would require large amounts of coding or recoding. At least that way, I'd still have "Vim Classic" to depend on, and if there are kewl new features I want, then I could use "New Vim" to get those features. > So if you have small things which "always bothered" you Yeah, VimL sucks hard. But I'd rather have to be required to learn and use that arcane language than significantly disrupt the existing Vim. A centralized, easy to read documentation of VimL would be just about as good as replacing VimL with something else. Vim can already use Python, Ruby and Lua in place of VimL. The problem is that the distro builders don't uniformly put those things in. One word about the feature concerning threads and Netbeans imitation: Geez, Vim's an editor, not a way of life. If I wanted a way of life, I'd already be using Emacs. Thanks, SteveT Steve Litt * http://www.troubleshooters.com/ Troubleshooting Training * Human Performance -- -- You received this message from the "vim_use" 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_use" 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.
