Planning Vim 7.3

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Planning Vim 7.3

Bram Moolenaar

Hello Vim users!

It has been a long time since the last release: Vim 7.2 was released in
August 2008.  There have been many patches, but not everybody will use
them.  It's about time for 7.3!

I will try to include a few patches that have been pending for a while.
I don't have much time available, thus I will only include things that
take a few hours of my time.  That basically means patches that are
ready to be included.

I will check the voting list to see what the most popular features are:
http://www.vim.org/sponsor/vote_results.php

One thing that I will certainly do is improve the MS-Windows installer.
I recently installed Vim on a new laptop and it didn't work very well.
More and more people are using Windows 7.  I think that taking Window XP
as the minimal platform will work well.  I hope we can make installing
Vim on MS-Windows as simple and reliable as possible.

I also plan to drop the split in "lang" and "extra" archives.  The
burden to have several feature sets is no longer justified by the
slightly smaller distribution.  Putting everything together makes things
a lot simpler.

Mercurial is going to be the primary method for distribution.  I'll
drop CVS, it slows me down too much.  Someone else might be able to
mirror the Mercurial repository in CVS, like it's done for Subversion.

I hope to bring out a first beta version by the end of May.  That gives
everybody time to send me updated and polished patches and runtime
files.  I need to have these halfway May, I also need some time to
integrate everything.

It would also be nice if we can update the spell files.  Volunteers
wanted!  See $VIMRUNTIME/spell/README.txt, the "MAINTAINING A LANGUAGE"
section.

--
SOLDIER: What? A swallow carrying a coconut?
ARTHUR:  It could grip it by the husk ...
                 "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD

 /// Bram Moolenaar -- [hidden email] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
///        sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\        download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org        ///
 \\\            help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org    ///

--
You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Planning Vim 7.3

Tony Mechelynck
On 11/04/10 16:33, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
[...]
> It would also be nice if we can update the spell files.  Volunteers
> wanted!  See $VIMRUNTIME/spell/README.txt, the "MAINTAINING A LANGUAGE"
> section.
>

IIUC, Mozilla uses the same spellfile format as Vim? If that's the case,
and if the Mozilla license (which, BTW, is undergoing revision, see
among others
http://blog.lizardwrangler.com/2010/03/10/updating-the-mozilla-public-license/ 
), or whatever other license some of these dictionaries may be using, is
found to be compatible with the Vim license, then maybe we could "just"
borrow the desired files from the dictionaries at
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/browse/type:3 ? (Note: an
.xpi is just a .zip under another name.)


Best regards,
Tony.
--
Heavy, adj.:
        Seduced by the chocolate side of the force.

--
You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Planning Vim 7.3

Bram Moolenaar
In reply to this post by Bram Moolenaar

Christian Brabandt wrote:

> Are you considering any patches from
> http://groups.google.com/group/vim_dev/web/vim-patches
> for inclusion?

Yes, but many of these patches are not mature.  E.g., first one,
"Improved regular expression engine", is still lacking the tests to
verify that it doesn't break anything.  That's a pity, because it can
make syntax highlighting much faster.

I want to avoid that I include something that triggers a long sequence
of bug fixes.  "Works fine for me" is not always a good indication.
7.3 is going to be a stable release, thus I don't want to take too much
risc.  Part of my work will be to estimate the risc, which involves
carefully looking through the code changes.

--
CART DRIVER: Bring out your dead!
   We follow the cart through a wretched, impoverished plague-ridden village.
   A few starved mongrels run about in the mud scavenging.  In the open
   doorway of one house perhaps we jug glimpse a pair of legs dangling from
   the ceiling.  In another doorway an OLD WOMAN is beating a cat against a
   wall rather like one does with a mat.  The cart passes round a dead donkey
   or cow in the mud.  And a MAN tied to a cart is being hammered to death by
   four NUNS with huge mallets.
                 "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD

 /// Bram Moolenaar -- [hidden email] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
///        sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
\\\        download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org        ///
 \\\            help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org    ///

--
You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Planning Vim 7.3

Tony Mechelynck
On 11/04/10 22:16, Bram Moolenaar wrote:

>
> Christian Brabandt wrote:
>
>> Are you considering any patches from
>> http://groups.google.com/group/vim_dev/web/vim-patches
>> for inclusion?
>
> Yes, but many of these patches are not mature.  E.g., first one,
> "Improved regular expression engine", is still lacking the tests to
> verify that it doesn't break anything.  That's a pity, because it can
> make syntax highlighting much faster.
>
> I want to avoid that I include something that triggers a long sequence
> of bug fixes.  "Works fine for me" is not always a good indication.
> 7.3 is going to be a stable release, thus I don't want to take too much
> risc.  Part of my work will be to estimate the risc, which involves
> carefully looking through the code changes.
>

It is true that they are in different stages of development. Here are my
top five; not in preference order.

#14 (Vince Negri's conceal/ownsyntax/cursorbind) already has a long
track record. I first heard about it when I first learned about Steve
Hall's Vim for Windows, that must have been in Vim 6.2 or 6.3 time, and
it was not new even then. Has documentation. Maybe too controversial
(not enough "mainline"-like) to be included by default? OTOH it has been
victim of bit-rotting in the past (i.e. conflict with "mainline"
patches) and of course bringing it in would eliminate that problem
forever. A compile-time option maybe (or two, or three)? You're the boss.

#13 (Access W32 clipboard from Cygwin "Unix" Vim) is interesting but
still in beta. IIUC ifdeffed by whatever FEAT_* corresponds to
has('win32unix'). Bring 'em in or let it bake some more?

#10 (Variable tabstops) sounds interesting. I haven't tested it.
Reportedly still in alpha. Probably wait some more (Vim 8.0 ?) but keep
an eye on it.

#9 (Relative line numbers) sounds interesting. I haven't tested it. Its
authors say "it works". I don't feel competent to evaluate it by
eyeballing the code.

#7 (Bill McCarthy's additional float functions). This one I've taken up
in my "Huge" Vim. Not a single problem AFAICT. Code examination shows
that it is done cleanly and simply, within #ifdef FEAT_FLOAT, and does
not interfere with other stuff outside the "call function -> return
value" codepath. IMHO this one is the most worthy of including into
mainline Vim (and perhaps the least risky). Maybe a one-time check in a
build with FEAT_EVAL on and FEAT_FLOAT off to make sure no #ifdef was
forgotten. (I already compile a Tiny build without +eval in addition to
my Huge build, from the same source, and no problems there either.)
Documentation exists and is well-written, as a separate helpfile to
avoid problems with rsync; probably merge that into eval.txt.


Best regards,
Tony.
--
    n = ((n >>  1) & 0x55555555) | ((n <<  1) & 0xaaaaaaaa);
    n = ((n >>  2) & 0x33333333) | ((n <<  2) & 0xcccccccc);
    n = ((n >>  4) & 0x0f0f0f0f) | ((n <<  4) & 0xf0f0f0f0);
    n = ((n >>  8) & 0x00ff00ff) | ((n <<  8) & 0xff00ff00);
    n = ((n >> 16) & 0x0000ffff) | ((n << 16) & 0xffff0000);

                -- C code which reverses the bits in a word.

--
You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Planning Vim 7.3

Edward L. Fox
In reply to this post by Bram Moolenaar
On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 04:33:31PM +0200, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
>
> Hello Vim users!
>
> [...]
>
> Mercurial is going to be the primary method for distribution.  I'll
> drop CVS, it slows me down too much.  Someone else might be able to
> mirror the Mercurial repository in CVS, like it's done for Subversion.

I don't think we have any reason to keep the CVS repository any
longer.  It's way too slow and rather user-unfriendly.  Nobody will
want to use CVS if he could have any other alternatives.

I think the Subversion repository should also be abandoned.  I tried
Mercurial, it's rather powerful and very easy to use.  I suggest that
we just stick with Mercurial and only use this as official repository.
If any other people wish to use other forms of repositories, they can
publish their unofficial mirrors, just as vim-cocoa does.

> I hope to bring out a first beta version by the end of May.  That gives
> everybody time to send me updated and polished patches and runtime
> files.  I need to have these halfway May, I also need some time to
> integrate everything.

What's the feature-freeze date?  I want to submit a small feature and
a tiny feature.  Hope I could have enough time for that.

> It would also be nice if we can update the spell files.  Volunteers
> wanted!  See $VIMRUNTIME/spell/README.txt, the "MAINTAINING A LANGUAGE"
> section.
>
> --
> SOLDIER: What? A swallow carrying a coconut?
> ARTHUR:  It could grip it by the husk ...
>                  "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD
>
>  /// Bram Moolenaar -- [hidden email] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net   \\\
> ///        sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\
> \\\        download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org        ///
>  \\\            help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org    ///
>
> --
> 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
>
> To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

--
You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Planning Vim 7.3

Nicholas Cole
In reply to this post by Tony Mechelynck
On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Tony Mechelynck
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 11/04/10 22:16, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
>>
>> Christian Brabandt wrote:
>>
>>> Are you considering any patches from
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/vim_dev/web/vim-patches
>>> for inclusion?
>>
>> Yes, but many of these patches are not mature.  E.g., first one,
>> "Improved regular expression engine", is still lacking the tests to
>> verify that it doesn't break anything.  That's a pity, because it can
>> make syntax highlighting much faster.
>>
>> I want to avoid that I include something that triggers a long sequence
>> of bug fixes.  "Works fine for me" is not always a good indication.
>> 7.3 is going to be a stable release, thus I don't want to take too much
>> risc.  Part of my work will be to estimate the risc, which involves
>> carefully looking through the code changes.
>>
>
> It is true that they are in different stages of development. Here are my top
> five; not in preference order.
>
> #14 (Vince Negri's conceal/ownsyntax/cursorbind) already has a long track
> record. I first heard about it when I first learned about Steve Hall's Vim
> for Windows, that must have been in Vim 6.2 or 6.3 time, and it was not new
> even then. Has documentation. Maybe too controversial (not enough
> "mainline"-like) to be included by default? OTOH it has been victim of
> bit-rotting in the past (i.e. conflict with "mainline" patches) and of
> course bringing it in would eliminate that problem forever. A compile-time
> option maybe (or two, or three)? You're the boss.

This thread has been a good reminder to renew my sponsorship, in part
because Vim deserves the support, and in part so I can vote again for
this patch!  I've never been clear why this patch should be
controversial, though.

Best wishes,

Nicholas

--
You received this message from the "vim_multibyte" maillist.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.