Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Ultimate Vim Distribution

vim.spf13.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 90 posts

Re: The Ultimate Vim Distribution

#3

Post by jlgreco »

I have said it before here when people have discussed packaging up Vim stuff, and I stick by it: I really don't see this taking off.

Switching to using this does not appeal to me, an existing Vim user, and I think I am not an exception. If this does something new that I like I'll gladly throw that part into my setup, but there really isn't any reason at all that I can see for wanting to use this.

I don't think this is good for new Vim users either. If you are new to Vim there already is no shortage of things to learn (I think GVim steps up in this role nicely). Throwing more things into the mix isn't going to help a thing. And as you (slowly) pick up more and more of stock Vim, you are going to naturally build up your own setup. Before you know it you'll be at the same point that I think existing users are generally at.

This all said, I'm also a zsh user who cannot fathom why oh-my-zsh is popular...

Re: The Ultimate Vim Distribution

#6

Post by Symmetry »

jlgreco wrote: post #3

I have said it before here when people have discussed packaging up Vim stuff, and I stick by it: I really don't see this taking off. Switching to using this does not appeal to me, an existing Vim user, and I think I am not an exception. If this does something new that I like I'll gladly throw that part into my setup, but there really isn't any reason at all that I can see for wanting to use this. I don't think this i…

In term sof new stuff that's true, but there are a lot of things that modern plugins provide that obsolete the traditional way of doing things. For instance, people using EasyMotion never have to worry about counting how many words ahead they're moving and then typing c69w or whatever. And likewise, there are some things that everybody should have in their .vimrc, like incremental search, and it doesn't make sense to learn to use the old way first.

Re: The Ultimate Vim Distribution

#8

Post by jlgreco »

Symmetry wrote: post #6
jlgreco wrote: post #3

I have said it before here when people have discussed packaging up Vim stuff, and I stick by it: I really don't see this taking off. Switching to using this does not appeal to me, an existing Vim user, and I think I am not an exception. If this does something new that I like I'll gladly throw that part into my setup, but there really isn't any reason at all that I can see for wanting to use this. I don't think this i…

In term sof new stuff that's true, but there are a lot of things that modern plugins provide that obsolete the traditional way of doing things. For instance, people using EasyMotion never have to worry about counting how many words ahead they're moving and then typing c69w or whatever. And likewise, there are some things that everybody should have in their .vimrc, like incremental search, and it doesn't make sense to…

There can absolutely be improvement on some default Vim settings. 'hlsearch' should definetly be the default, and I think it is a crime that 'hidden' isn't. There are easily dozens of other examples.

However I think these should be made defaults in Vim itself, not in some grabbag of stuff we hand new users on their way in. I think it is important that every Vim user knows exactly what ways their setup differs from the default, and this is only feasible if every difference from the default (the real default) is made by the user.

Re: The Ultimate Vim Distribution

#10

Post by jlgreco »

mcrittenden wrote: post #9
andyl wrote: post #5

Like everything except vundle. (I use tpope's pathogen) Pre-packaged vim on github is a very nice way to distribute.

I'm curious as to why you (or anyone) would prefer pathogen to vundle? Vundle just seems like pathogen except with less manual work.

I switched from Pathogen to Vundle, at the prodding of people on HN, and I can't say I am all that thrilled about the difference. It basically does what Pathogen does, plus it does a bit more. The issue is that the "bit more" that it does just doesn't seem... polished.. to me, and covers things that I never found troublesome to do manually anyway. I'm not going to switch back (since it does what Pathogen does there isn't a reason), but I don't think it is better, just different.
Post reply on HN