On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 01:44:50PM -0700, Brian L. Matthews wrote: > > You don't need CTRL-W at all if you don't mind hitting more keys, but > > since we do have it and configurable behaviour, why not cover all the > > variations people could want? > > While this is more software design philosophy than vim-specific, it's > because every configurable behavior requires code to parse the new option > (however minimal), code to use the new option, one or more tests, > documentation changes, it makes the code that little bit harder to maintain > and learn, and it makes learning to use the software a little bit harder. If > the new behavior is significantly better, then yes, why not. I'm not sure if > this qualifies.
If you want software minimalism, you have a ton of editors to choose from. > There's a difference between changing long-existing behavior and adding new > behavior. Yes, I wouldn't be happy if bs=2 went away, I use that all the > time (with BS). Umm, bs already has three options. Arguing that 3 is the perfect number seems really odd. Any option that you wouldn't use doesn't make vim better for you, but it sure does for other people... that's a good thing! I happily volunteer any of the options you use that I don't to make the option counts neutral, how's that ;-) Tavis. -- ------------------------------------- [email protected] | finger me for my pgp key. ------------------------------------------------------- -- -- 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]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/vim_use/20200414215924.GA1388%40thinkstation.
