> So if you're talking about the "real" thing also say why something is "real" and the other is not.
I meant that emulating will be a substitute. Since NeoBundle and VAM both have unique features so neither can emulate the other. Emulating NeoBundle in VAM won't be the real NeoBundle, as emulating VAM in NeoBundle wouldn't be the real VAM. I think spending time on emulation in this case is wasted time. On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 10:40 AM, Marc Weber <[email protected]> wrote: > > What's the "fixing Vim" means? > > I think plugin managers are important. But I don't know about "fixing > Vim". > See here about a list of things I think should be improved one day: > http://vim-wiki.mawercer.de/wiki/topic/in-which-way-does-vim-suck.html > > Wow, that is ambitious.... vim-mutiny... forking vim... hmm... it doesn't really feel right to do it, but if patches are made and are two years on the TODO list without explanation it is inevitable in the end. Dropping the vi compatible mode will clean up the source too. But forking will divide the community, so it will be of the highest importance to create a community and developer friendly environment. If it isn't better than Vim's it will fail. Patches must be included or prosponed/declined with a reason as soon as possible. Two years is ridiculous. Information is everything. Every wish should be commented: will it be included? Why is this wish on the wishlist for so long? Is the implementation of this simple wish just very hard? The wishlist should look like a FAQ. With a status of development, so users can see what features are worked on. Vim's website is not very userfriendly. As you said the plugin managers aren't clearly mentioned. Built-in synchronous handling would be great. Major point is the embedding of vim, which seems very hard to do, it's on the vim wishlist for ages. But adds so much possibilities. What about a firefox plugin that replaces all textareas with little borderless vim windows? Or be able to embed vim in your IDE? What about embedding the real Vim with all it's features in EMACS? The real strength of EMACS is not the texteditor. I can see the headlines already "Marc Weber, the man who ended the Vim-EMACS flamewars forever." :) Forking Vim makes it possible to break compatibility where neccessary to make major improvements. But there is still the problem of ancient code. The best result would be to rewerite from scratch but that is undoable. But with a fork, you probably are able to replace some parts piece by piece. With enough developers supporting this it would be possible. Thinking about it... can't support you with money, but testing and development are possible. C is a long time ago for me. Interesting ideas, Marc. -- -- 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]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
