Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[vim-mac] Re: Thanks!! (Was MacVim Official Website)

Expand Messages
  • Bob Batson
    ... [snip] ==================================================================== Bob Batson L 39 12 14 N 94 33 16 W bob@sky.net
    Message 1 of 6 , Feb 24 2:17 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      On Thu, 24 Feb 2000, Sven Guckes wrote:

      > * Bob Batson <bob@...> [000224 02:07]:
      > > What's the URL of the official website for "VIM for macintosh"?

      [snip]



      ====================================================================
      Bob Batson L 39 12 14 N 94 33 16 W
      bob@... Kansas City
      TCS - Mystic Fire Priest USDA zone 5b
    • david craig
      Thanks for clarifying; it s appreciated. A question I meant to ask in my first post: Do the version numbers of the respective applications have anything to do
      Message 2 of 6 , Feb 25 6:06 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Thanks for clarifying; it's appreciated. A question
        I meant to ask in my first post: Do the version numbers
        of the respective applications have anything to do
        with one another? I suppose that the presumption would
        be that the application version number refers to that
        of the port, then? (To say it another way, would versions
        5.6 of these two implementations of VIM have, in theory,
        an essential parity in VIM features, differing primarily
        in how the authors went about implementing them, and
        perhaps what goodies above and beyond VIM itself the
        authors throw in?)

        Amazing how I can be so baffled by something so simple :-)

        David


        On Sat, 26 Feb 2000, H. Eckert wrote:

        > Quoting david craig (dac@...):
        > > <http://www-public.tu-bs.de:8080/~i0080108/macvim.html>
        > > <http://www3.sympatico.ca/dany.stamant/vim>
        > >
        > > entirely different ports of Vim to the Mac? Or different
        > > versions of the same port? Or what, exactly? They both
        >
        > Different versions from the same port. There is just on main
        > port but several people working on it and putting snapshots of
        > their corresponding current version on the net.
        >
        >
        > Greetings,
        > Ripley
        > --
        > H. Eckert, 10777 Berlin, Germany, http://www.in-berlin.de/User/nostromo/
        > ISO 8859-1: Ä=Ae, Ö=Oe, Ü=Ue, ä=ae, ö=oe, ü=ue, ß=sz.
        > "(Technobabbel)" (Jetrel) - "Müssen wir uns diesen Schwachsinn wirklich
        > anhören?" (Neelix)
        >


        David


        <http://cda.mrs.umn.edu/~dac/>
      • Axel Kielhorn
        ... Yes. ... Right ... Correct. MacVim on my page was compiled before 5.6 was available and I left my compiler just after putting it on my homepage. In the
        Message 3 of 6 , Feb 26 7:22 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          At 11:06 Uhr +0900 2000-02-26, david craig wrote:
          >Thanks for clarifying; it's appreciated. A question
          >I meant to ask in my first post: Do the version numbers
          >of the respective applications have anything to do
          >with one another?

          Yes.

          >I suppose that the presumption would
          >be that the application version number refers to that
          >of the port, then?

          Right

          >(To say it another way, would versions
          >5.6 of these two implementations of VIM have, in theory,
          >an essential parity in VIM features, differing primarily
          >in how the authors went about implementing them, and
          >perhaps what goodies above and beyond VIM itself the
          >authors throw in?)

          Correct.

          MacVim on my page was compiled before 5.6 was available and I left my
          compiler just after putting it on my homepage. In the meantime Dany took
          the 5.6 release, fixed some bugs and released it on his page.

          When I'm back in Germany I will download 5.6 release (+patches) and Dany's
          patches and build a new version which I will put on my homepage.

          The main differences are:
          Dany's version is FAT, I have separate binaries for 68k and PPC
          My 68k version has syntax disabled, don't know about Dany's.
          My version is compiled with CWPro2 Dany's with CW9 (IIRC).

          The rule of thump is:
          Whoever has time puts a binary on his page.

          Axel

          who would be surprised to see this on the list, becuase I'm writing from a
          different address than my subscribe address.

          --
          Adults get far more pleasure from adultery
          than children do from infancy
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.