On 26/08/08 23:38, Markus Heidelberg wrote:
> Tony Mechelynck, 24.08.2008:
>> OTOH, I would have nothing against both above-mentioned patches being
>> incorporated into the mainline sources, Bill's patch as part of the
>> +float feature, and your relative-numbers patch either as standard or as
>> another optional feature (I suppose the latter would imply bracketing
>> all its changes in #ifdef directives but it might be the better choice).
>> But of course Bram has the final say on this matter.
>
> If encapsulating the feature in #ifdef directives would be required for
> mainline, I would do it. But I don't think it's the better choice. It is a
> small feature and by using #ifdef the source code would be split up even
> though much of the environment already exists because of the 'number' option.
>
> Markus
Well, #ifdef's would be needed if this feature is included as optional
(meaning you can include or exclude it at compile-time and test for it
with has()). If the fature is included as standard they aren't
necessary, but maybe Bram won't want to include as standard, or maybe
not at all, we'll see. In any case, the availability can still be tested
with exists('+relativenumber') or something (name of the option with a
plus sign) and anyone using the feature should test it this way until
any builds without it are hopelessly obsolete (if ever).
Best regards,
Tony.
--
Winter is the season in which people try to keep the house as warm as
it was in the summer, when they complained about the heat.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
