Tony Mechelynck <[email protected]> wrote: > On 05/07/09 23:49, Ken Bloom wrote: >> Actually, if we were to explore the possiblities for a true-bidi >> (g)vim that didn't depend on a bidi terminal, I think we could come up >> with a much better and much more intuitive bidi editor than the >> existing editors. (For examples of why I think so, see above.) >> >> --Ken > > Quite possibly. The problem, I think, would be to program the true-bidi > capability without introducing bugs in what we already have. I suppose > quite a lot of testing would be necessary before those changes become > part of mainline Vim -- but I hope they eventually will.
Then I recommend creating a new branch in the vim Subversion repository, or creating a clone of the repository in git or one of the other distributed version control systems. Implement the true-bidi version there, and when it's ready then submit a patch, or merge the results back. --Ken -- Chanoch (Ken) Bloom. PhD candidate. Linguistic Cognition Laboratory. Department of Computer Science. Illinois Institute of Technology. http://www.iit.edu/~kbloom1/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
