Hello Dr. chip,
Excerpt from Charles E Campbell Jr: -- <snip> -- > Hello! > > I've been on vacation this week, attending my daughter's graduation from > Emory University. Congratulations. > I have several concerns about this proposal: > > * vim.vim : there's a large block of code that I generate automatically > in syntax/vim.vim. Any changes made in that block of code, which is > marked in the syntax file, will be wiped out whenever I make an update > there. > > * sh.vim : by default it supports borne shell; most (including myself) > use either Korn/Posix or Bash. In my experience there's been a lot of > narrowmindedness on this; folks use bash and complain that its not > supporting bash by default, and those using Korn/Posix complain that its > not supporting Korn/Posix by default. I've left it at Borne to > encourage people to make a choice. There is a potential issue with > maintainers imposing their view about the default. > > * tex.vim : I am trying to keep out package support. There are > thousands if not tens of thousands of packages supporting various > optional features in LaTeX; it is impractical to expect vim's > syntax/tex.vim to support them all (and they may not even co-exist > properly). syntax/tex.vim is already quite large enough without lots of > package support. I've encouraged users to write > after/syntax/tex/pkgname.vim files to support their packages, and to > post them on vim.sf.net. I can foresee that we'll have maintainers > imposing their package support into syntax/tex.vim, which is a potential > problem of this approach. I can assure that your files are all well maintained. I have no reason to change that. > > Well, I need to get some gas for my lawnmower. > > See you! > Chip Campbell > -- Regards, Thilo 4096R/0xC70B1A8F 721B 1BA0 095C 1ABA 3FC6 7C18 89A4 A2A0 C70B 1A8F -- 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
