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

Re: Hello, and allout-vim 031229

Expand Messages
  • Benji Fisher
    ... Perhaps, because of the Python component, your script is more complicated than the typical script posted on www.vim.org . For the typical vim script, I
    Message 1 of 21 , Dec 30, 2003
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, Dec 30, 2003 at 05:44:21PM -0500, François Pinard wrote:
      > [Benji Fisher]
      > > [François Pinard]
      >
      > > It would be easier to install if, before making the tarball, you put the
      > > files in the appropriate (sub)directory structure: syntax/allout.vim,
      > > ftplugin/allout.vim , doc/allout.txt . Then, the files could be
      > > installed by changing to the right directory (depending on personal or
      > > system-wide installation) and using "tar -xzvf" .
      >
      > I quite understand this suggestion, yet it is fairly unusual in my
      > experience that one needs to change to a particular directory before
      > unpacking a `tar' distribution. One would then need to unpack twice,
      > first for discovering what to do, then for doing the real installation.
      > Moreover, there are files in a distribution (like `README', `THANKS'
      > or `Makefile'), which are better left out of the goal tree. I guess I
      > should try to manage with more usual ways, like inviting users to edit a
      > `Makefile' if necessary, then relying on some `make install'.

      Perhaps, because of the Python component, your script is more
      complicated than the typical script posted on www.vim.org . For the
      typical vim script, I post install details when uploading the script,
      so I do not need a README; there is no Makefile; and THANKS can go in
      doc/foo.txt . Please do not move to Makefile installation: just as the
      vim community caters to users who are still maintaining their 386
      machines, we try to make life easy for those stuck on (in?) Windows, who
      do not have GNU make available.

      > > It is hard to say whether discussions of vim scripting belong on
      > > this list or on the vim-dev mailing list. I do not think anyone will
      > > complain if you use this one. :-)
      >
      > I'm far from being a Vim developer, still being an apprentice user.
      > The internals are still quite unknown to me. For other projects I know,
      > typical user questions like mine, would they be about scripting, would
      > be unwelcome; so it did not occur to me that `vim-dev' could be proper.
      > So, I'll try using the `vim' list for questions, and see what happens...

      The vim-dev list is used for discussions of developing scripts as
      well as working with the vim internals. Personally, I rarely look at
      the vim code base. (Make that "almost never"!) Still, I read, and
      often contribute to, the vim-dev list. That is why I said, "it is hard
      to say...": discussions of vomplicated scripts fall in between the two
      lists, and are usually welcome on either.

      HTH --Benji Fisher
    • Mikolaj Machowski
      ... How these thing are solved you can look at vimoutliner (sorry, don t remember exact number of script at vim-online). m. -- LaTeX + Vim =
      Message 2 of 21 , Dec 30, 2003
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Dnia Tuesday 30 of December 2003 23:44, François Pinard napisał:
        > I quite understand this suggestion, yet it is fairly unusual in my
        > experience that one needs to change to a particular directory before
        > unpacking a `tar' distribution. One would then need to unpack twice,
        > first for discovering what to do, then for doing the real installation.
        > Moreover, there are files in a distribution (like `README', `THANKS'
        > or `Makefile'), which are better left out of the goal tree. I guess I
        > should try to manage with more usual ways, like inviting users to edit a
        > `Makefile' if necessary, then relying on some `make install'.

        How these thing are solved you can look at vimoutliner (sorry, don't
        remember exact number of script at vim-online).

        m.
        --
        LaTeX + Vim = http://vim-latex.sourceforge.net/
        Vim-list(s) Users Map: (last change 12 Dec)
        http://skawina.eu.org/mikolaj/vimlist
        Are You There?
      • François Pinard
        [Benji Fisher] ... Under? :-) -- François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
        Message 3 of 21 , Dec 30, 2003
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          [Benji Fisher]

          > we try to make life easy for those stuck on (in?) Windows [...]

          Under? :-)

          --
          François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
        • François Pinard
          [Mikolaj Machowski] ... It is comforting for me to see that others are interested as well. I m saving your message for later pondering. :-) Thanks! ... Looking
          Message 4 of 21 , Dec 30, 2003
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            [Mikolaj Machowski]
            > [François Pinard]

            > > What I most miss right now in Vim is a PSGML equivalent, but I feel that
            > > a big amount of work would be needed to rewrite it, so I'm not holding
            > > my breath.

            > Don't hold your breath but don't lose hope [...]

            It is comforting for me to see that others are interested as well.
            I'm saving your message for later pondering. :-) Thanks!

            > Bram vaguely promised features for 6.3 which should remove some
            > obstacles (eg. internal grep, insert mode custom completion).

            Looking at Vim script, the language, I was surprised to see a few
            Pythonisms in there, so I thought for a short moment that Bram might
            be some secret Python admirer, yet too shy for daring the full jump.
            Beyond phantasm :-), it might more likely be that both Vim script and
            Python borrowed some good ideas from similar sources!

            > Also found PyXML which is promising in DTD front [...]

            This might not be sufficient. XML is stripped down SGML. Properly
            understanding and acting on a DTD is a difficult problem, and PSGML
            addresses it at the SGML level. Doing it at the XML level might be too
            weak. Despite impressive, PSGML does not even do full analysis, users
            rely on James Clark's external tools for dependable verification.

            I am not sure (really! I see pros and cons) if addressing SGML analysis
            in Vim is the correct thing to do. It would be a mistake for me trying
            to make Vim looks like Emacs, and not recognising different work
            paradigms conveyed by Vim. On the other hand, clever editing of SGML is
            still a strong need, for which I do not see much replacement right now,
            besides adopting tools for which editing is not the strong suite...

            --
            François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
          • Bram Moolenaar
            ... I do enjoy using Python. I am thinking of a way to intwine Python in Vim script better. It should help providing more data types without inventing it
            Message 5 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              François Pinard wrote:

              > > Bram vaguely promised features for 6.3 which should remove some
              > > obstacles (eg. internal grep, insert mode custom completion).
              >
              > Looking at Vim script, the language, I was surprised to see a few
              > Pythonisms in there, so I thought for a short moment that Bram might
              > be some secret Python admirer, yet too shy for daring the full jump.
              > Beyond phantasm :-), it might more likely be that both Vim script and
              > Python borrowed some good ideas from similar sources!

              I do enjoy using Python. I am thinking of a way to intwine Python in
              Vim script better. It should help providing more data types without
              inventing it all.

              --
              hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
              110. You actually volunteer to become your employer's webmaster.

              /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
              /// Creator of Vim - Vi IMproved -- http://www.Vim.org \\\
              \\\ Project leader for A-A-P -- http://www.A-A-P.org ///
              \\\ Help AIDS victims, buy here: http://ICCF-Holland.org/click1.html ///
            • Mikolaj Machowski
              ... Analysis of DTD wasn t done in Vim but in external tool - PerlSGML. Vim was only acting on data files created by simple perl script using PerlSGML (no real
              Message 6 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Dnia Wednesday 31 of December 2003 02:06, François Pinard napisał:
                > I am not sure (really! I see pros and cons) if addressing SGML analysis
                > in Vim is the correct thing to do. It would be a mistake for me trying
                > to make Vim looks like Emacs, and not recognising different work
                > paradigms conveyed by Vim. On the other hand, clever editing of SGML is
                > still a strong need, for which I do not see much replacement right now,
                > besides adopting tools for which editing is not the strong suite...

                Analysis of DTD wasn't done in Vim but in external tool - PerlSGML.
                Vim was only acting on data files created by simple perl script using
                PerlSGML (no real time analysis on DTD like in PSGML). It looks like
                (from datafile for docbook):

                let g:XML_accel_childs = 'replaceable,inlinegraphic,inlinemediaobject,
                indexterm,beginpage'
                let g:XML_accel_attrs = 'conformance,lang,xreflabel,remap,arch,os,revision,
                userlevel,revisionflag,security,id,role,condition,vendor'
                let g:XML_accel_revisionflag = 'changed,added,deleted,off'

                Vim script was only checking inside which tag cursor is.

                m.
                --
                LaTeX + Vim = http://vim-latex.sourceforge.net/
                Vim-list(s) Users Map: (last change 12 Dec)
                http://skawina.eu.org/mikolaj/vimlist
                Are You There?
              • François Pinard
                [Benji Fisher] ... Because of old habits, my preference goes towards _not_ putting `THANKS , `TODO , `NEWS , `ChangeLog , `INSTALL , `ABOUT-NLS , and such,
                Message 7 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  [Benji Fisher]
                  > [François Pinard]
                  > > [Benji Fisher]

                  > > > [allout-vim] would be easier to install if, before making the tarball,
                  > > > you put the files in the appropriate (sub)directory structure:
                  > > > syntax/allout.vim, ftplugin/allout.vim , doc/allout.txt . Then,
                  > > > the files could be installed by changing to the right directory
                  > > > (depending on personal or system-wide installation) and using "tar
                  > > > -xzvf" .

                  > > I guess I should try to manage with more usual ways, like inviting
                  > > users to edit a `Makefile' if necessary, then relying on some `make
                  > > install'.

                  > For the typical vim script, I post install details when uploading the
                  > script, so I do not need a README; there is no Makefile; and THANKS
                  > can go in doc/foo.txt .

                  Because of old habits, my preference goes towards _not_ putting
                  `THANKS', `TODO', `NEWS', `ChangeLog', `INSTALL', `ABOUT-NLS', and such,
                  into user documentation. Moreover, the `README' is still necessary
                  so the installers could get started. However, where simplicity is
                  manageable without impacting on quality, it is surely attractive.

                  > Please do not move to Makefile installation: just as the vim community
                  > caters to users who are still maintaining their 386 machines, we try
                  > to make life easy for those stuck on (in?) Windows, who do not have
                  > GNU make available.

                  Overall, there is quality level for distributions that should not be
                  merely dismissed merely because there are systems around which lack
                  usual tools. On the other hand, it also became usual and common to
                  prepare "binary" or ready-to-go distributions for such systems.

                  So, I'll try both for now, and `allout-vim' will be offered as `.tgz'
                  files as well as a `.zip' files. The `.tgz' distribution gets
                  administrative files, and is installable through `make install'. The
                  `.zip' distribution may be unpacked directly over the right directory,
                  and users might have to manage a bit to find out what to do. I'll do
                  some compromises, for Windows users, within the Vim help file.

                  I hope this will be good enough.

                  (And to everybody, I wish a joyful transition to the incoming new year!)

                  --
                  François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
                • brocken22@gmx.de
                  I m almost new to Vim and would appreciate if it s possible to download an archive of all the posts to vim@vim.org . This would make it easier for me to find
                  Message 8 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    I'm almost new to Vim and would appreciate if it's possible to download
                    an archive of all the posts to vim@... .
                    This would make it easier for me to find quickly help to some
                    questions(especially offline on the road :-) ).

                    Sven
                  • Keith Roberts
                    ... I don t think you really want to download the entire archive ... ... will give you some info, but basically it points you to the archives for the various
                    Message 9 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >-----Original Message-----
                      >From: brocken22@... [mailto:brocken22@...]
                      >Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 8:39 AM
                      >Cc: vim@...
                      >Subject: List Archive
                      >
                      >I'm almost new to Vim and would appreciate if it's possible to download
                      >an archive of all the posts to vim@... .
                      >This would make it easier for me to find quickly help to some
                      >questions(especially offline on the road :-) ).
                      >
                      >Sven

                      I don't think you really want to "download" the entire archive ...

                      :h maillist-archive

                      will give you some info, but basically it points you to the archives for the
                      various lists, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vim being the one for this
                      particular list.

                      On that page there is a search box, which will bring up messages related to
                      your search criteria.

                      Good vimming!

                      --
                      Keith
                    • Keith Roberts
                      ... If you are going to all that trouble already, then why not just create a self-extracting .exe? [for Windows, of course; I know nothing, yet, about
                      Message 10 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        >-----Original Message-----
                        >From: François Pinard [mailto:pinard@...]
                        >Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 8:06 AM
                        >To: vim@...
                        >Subject: Re: Hello, and allout-vim 031229
                        >
                        >[Benji Fisher]
                        >> [François Pinard]
                        >> > [Benji Fisher]
                        >
                        >> > > [allout-vim] would be easier to install if, before making the
                        >tarball,
                        >> > > you put the files in the appropriate (sub)directory structure:
                        >> > > syntax/allout.vim, ftplugin/allout.vim , doc/allout.txt . Then,
                        >> > > the files could be installed by changing to the right directory
                        >> > > (depending on personal or system-wide installation) and using "tar
                        >> > > -xzvf" .
                        >
                        >> > I guess I should try to manage with more usual ways, like inviting
                        >> > users to edit a `Makefile' if necessary, then relying on some `make
                        >> > install'.
                        >
                        >> For the typical vim script, I post install details when uploading the
                        >> script, so I do not need a README; there is no Makefile; and THANKS
                        >> can go in doc/foo.txt .
                        >
                        >Because of old habits, my preference goes towards _not_ putting
                        >`THANKS', `TODO', `NEWS', `ChangeLog', `INSTALL', `ABOUT-NLS', and such,
                        >into user documentation. Moreover, the `README' is still necessary
                        >so the installers could get started. However, where simplicity is
                        >manageable without impacting on quality, it is surely attractive.
                        >
                        >> Please do not move to Makefile installation: just as the vim community
                        >> caters to users who are still maintaining their 386 machines, we try
                        >> to make life easy for those stuck on (in?) Windows, who do not have
                        >> GNU make available.
                        >
                        >Overall, there is quality level for distributions that should not be
                        >merely dismissed merely because there are systems around which lack
                        >usual tools. On the other hand, it also became usual and common to
                        >prepare "binary" or ready-to-go distributions for such systems.
                        >
                        >So, I'll try both for now, and `allout-vim' will be offered as `.tgz'
                        >files as well as a `.zip' files. The `.tgz' distribution gets
                        >administrative files, and is installable through `make install'. The
                        >`.zip' distribution may be unpacked directly over the right directory,
                        >and users might have to manage a bit to find out what to do. I'll do
                        >some compromises, for Windows users, within the Vim help file.
                        >
                        >I hope this will be good enough.
                        >
                        >(And to everybody, I wish a joyful transition to the incoming new year!)
                        >
                        >--
                        >François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard

                        If you are going to all that trouble already, then why not just create a
                        self-extracting .exe? [for Windows, of course; I know nothing, yet, about
                        installing elsewhere] If all the support files are located correctly in the
                        hierarchy, then it should be a simple matter of asking the user where to
                        install it, then doing so. You could even show the README to the user, if
                        necessary, wherever appropriate in the install process.
                      • François Pinard
                        [Benji Fisher] ... Thanks for the pointer. Indeed, many hundreds of scripts already exist there, seems like it is a good resource. ... As it was apparently
                        Message 11 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          [Benji Fisher]
                          > [François Pinard]

                          > > I'm not much experienced either at publishing Vim scripts.

                          > The usual place for distributing vim scripts is
                          > http://vim.sourceforge.net/scripts/index.php

                          Thanks for the pointer. Indeed, many hundreds of scripts already exist
                          there, seems like it is a good resource.

                          > More users are likely to discover your scripts there, and it gives you
                          > a place to post a description and installation instructions.

                          As it was apparently _required_ to upload something for registering a
                          description, I uploaded something. In the installation instructions, I
                          quickly explained from where the real latest copy should be uploaded.

                          > You may also be interested in vimsh.tar.gz (which I have not tried).

                          I fetched it a few days ago, curious to find out how the script could
                          handle asynchronous reception of output from another process: it seems
                          it does not really. About using it, I'll wait a bit: if I run for tools
                          which repeat Emacs paradigms into Vim, I might cut myself from the
                          training I want to get about effectively using Vim in conjunction with
                          heterogenous windows.

                          > Under "Personal installation," I think you should change
                          > doc/allout.vim to doc/allout.txt . [...]

                          Thanks for these notes, I corrected the documentation appropriately.

                          > There is not yet a standard place for Python scripts used from within
                          > vim. Perhaps we need a standard, or perhaps they should be kept with
                          > other (not vim-specific) Python scripts.

                          A .../python/ directory, next to .../ftplugin/, .../syntax/, etc.
                          might be a nice convention to adopt, and whenever Python is enabled in
                          Vim, such existing $VIMRUNTIME/python/ or in ~/.vim/python/ should be
                          automatically added to `sys.path' by this Python which is linked into
                          Vim proper. I do not think .../python/ should be a sub-directory of
                          .../ftplugin, or any other, because it might be usefully called from Vim
                          scripts which may be found a bit everywhere.

                          If a Python script is so Vim specific that it cannot reasonably be used
                          outside of Vim, it would be only normal that it is _not_ kept with other
                          Python scripts, but only within some .../python/ directory above. If a
                          script is part of a packaged installed outside Vim, because it offers
                          many general facilities which are unrelated to Vim, this package would
                          be reachable from within Vim as well.

                          --
                          François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
                        • François Pinard
                          [Mikolaj Machowski] ... I m getting: Search Results Searched scripts for vimoutliner Showing 0 to 0 of 0 results Your search returned no results so
                          Message 12 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            [Mikolaj Machowski]

                            > How these thing are solved you can look at vimoutliner (sorry, don't
                            > remember exact number of script at vim-online).

                            I'm getting:

                            Search Results
                            Searched scripts for "vimoutliner" Showing 0 to 0 of 0 results
                            Your search returned no results

                            so I guess I would need some more precise reference...

                            --
                            François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
                          • François Pinard
                            [Bram Moolenaar] ... How does Vim script works? Do you compile it to intermediate code, or perform full analysis at run time even when looping? In the later
                            Message 13 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                            View Source
                            • 0 Attachment
                              [Bram Moolenaar]

                              > I do enjoy using Python. I am thinking of a way to intwine Python in
                              > Vim script better. It should help providing more data types without
                              > inventing it all.

                              How does Vim script works? Do you compile it to intermediate code,
                              or perform full analysis at run time even when looping? In the later
                              case, it is not unlikely that Python be faster than Vim script. When in
                              Python, I use `vim.command()' or `vim.eval()', I cannot escape thinking
                              that compilation (or at least scanning) occurs every time.

                              I'm curious. In which direction(s?) are your thoughts leading you?
                              Humph! I realise that answering that question might call for a novel...
                              Please feel free to _not_ reply, there will be no offence! :-)

                              --
                              François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
                            • François Pinard
                              [Keith Roberts] ... I m not that familiar with Microsoft systems, but it requires a lot of confidence for me to run executable prepared by someone which I do
                              Message 14 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                              View Source
                              • 0 Attachment
                                [Keith Roberts]

                                > If you are going to all that trouble already, then why not just create a
                                > self-extracting .exe?

                                I'm not that familiar with Microsoft systems, but it requires a lot
                                of confidence for me to run executable prepared by someone which I do
                                not really trust. It implies virus detectors, and such things. And
                                moreover, for me, it likely means that I shall buy and learn packaging
                                software, and I do not really need either! :-) Providing a mere archive
                                is so transparent: the user may scrutinise it if s/he feels like it.

                                Preparing a `.tgz', that's trouble I'm pretty used to, I've not much of
                                a problem there. If I prepare a `.zip' file in the format suggested by
                                Benji (easy now that the Makefile to do so has been written), this is
                                because he stressed that Microsoft users do not have `make' (or `tar').

                                > If all the support files are located correctly in the hierarchy, then
                                > it should be a simple matter of asking the user where to install
                                > it, then doing so. You could even show the README to the user, if
                                > necessary, wherever appropriate in the install process.

                                The `allout-vim' I wrote is a tiny thing, likely not to be popular. I
                                take it as a learning exercise about scripting Vim, and a way to get a
                                feeling of the Vim community. But if someone is kind enough to take me
                                by the hand and bring me on the technical details about creating nicer
                                archives for Microsoft users, in a way that I could fully automate here,
                                and using only small free-source tools, I'm surely willing to listen!

                                --
                                François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard
                              • Benji Fisher
                                ... IIRC, the (free) search engine on the web site is not very powerful, so I try to go easy on it. Try searching for scripts with the key word outliner and
                                Message 15 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                                View Source
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On Wed, Dec 31, 2003 at 03:06:43PM -0500, François Pinard wrote:
                                  > [Mikolaj Machowski]
                                  >
                                  > > How these thing are solved you can look at vimoutliner (sorry, don't
                                  > > remember exact number of script at vim-online).
                                  >
                                  > I'm getting:
                                  >
                                  > Search Results
                                  > Searched scripts for "vimoutliner" Showing 0 to 0 of 0 results
                                  > Your search returned no results
                                  >
                                  > so I guess I would need some more precise reference...

                                  IIRC, the (free) search engine on the web site is not very
                                  powerful, so I try to go easy on it. Try searching for scripts with the
                                  key word "outliner" and you find one:

                                  http://www.vim.org/scripts/script_search_results.php?keywords=outliner&script_type=&order_by=rating&direction=descending&search=search

                                  (That's the search page; it points to TVO, The Vim Outliner:
                                  http://www.vim.org/scripts/script.php?script_id=517 .)

                                  It looks as though the most recent version is barely a week old.

                                  HTH --Benji Fisher
                                • Keith Roberts
                                  ... Very good! I know even less about this stuff than you do, so I hope that anyone who chooses to offer some tutelage does so on-list, so that I (and maybe
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Dec 31, 2003
                                  View Source
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    >-----Original Message-----
                                    >From: François Pinard [mailto:pinard@...]
                                    >Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 12:55 PM
                                    >To: Keith Roberts
                                    >Cc: vim@...
                                    >Subject: Re: Hello, and allout-vim 031229
                                    >
                                    >[Keith Roberts]
                                    >
                                    >> If you are going to all that trouble already, then why not just create a
                                    >> self-extracting .exe?
                                    >
                                    >I'm not that familiar with Microsoft systems, but it requires a lot
                                    >of confidence for me to run executable prepared by someone which I do
                                    >not really trust. It implies virus detectors, and such things. And
                                    >moreover, for me, it likely means that I shall buy and learn packaging
                                    >software, and I do not really need either! :-) Providing a mere archive
                                    >is so transparent: the user may scrutinise it if s/he feels like it.
                                    >
                                    >Preparing a `.tgz', that's trouble I'm pretty used to, I've not much of
                                    >a problem there. If I prepare a `.zip' file in the format suggested by
                                    >Benji (easy now that the Makefile to do so has been written), this is
                                    >because he stressed that Microsoft users do not have `make' (or `tar').
                                    >
                                    >> If all the support files are located correctly in the hierarchy, then
                                    >> it should be a simple matter of asking the user where to install
                                    >> it, then doing so. You could even show the README to the user, if
                                    >> necessary, wherever appropriate in the install process.
                                    >
                                    >The `allout-vim' I wrote is a tiny thing, likely not to be popular. I
                                    >take it as a learning exercise about scripting Vim, and a way to get a
                                    >feeling of the Vim community. But if someone is kind enough to take me
                                    >by the hand and bring me on the technical details about creating nicer
                                    >archives for Microsoft users, in a way that I could fully automate here,
                                    >and using only small free-source tools, I'm surely willing to listen!
                                    >
                                    >--
                                    >François Pinard http://www.iro.umontreal.ca/~pinard

                                    Very good! I know even less about this stuff than you do, so I hope that
                                    anyone who chooses to offer some tutelage does so on-list, so that I (and
                                    maybe others) can avail ourselves of that knowledge as well.
                                  • Bram Moolenaar
                                    ... Vim comands are interpreted. There is no intermediate code. Some kind of pre-compilation could speed up loops and scripts that are used more than once.
                                    Message 17 of 21 , Jan 1, 2004
                                    View Source
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      François Pinard wrote:

                                      > [Bram Moolenaar]
                                      >
                                      > > I do enjoy using Python. I am thinking of a way to intwine Python in
                                      > > Vim script better. It should help providing more data types without
                                      > > inventing it all.
                                      >
                                      > How does Vim script works? Do you compile it to intermediate code,
                                      > or perform full analysis at run time even when looping? In the later
                                      > case, it is not unlikely that Python be faster than Vim script. When in
                                      > Python, I use `vim.command()' or `vim.eval()', I cannot escape thinking
                                      > that compilation (or at least scanning) occurs every time.

                                      Vim comands are interpreted. There is no intermediate code. Some kind
                                      of pre-compilation could speed up loops and scripts that are used more
                                      than once. That would be quite a lot of work to implement though.

                                      --
                                      hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
                                      115. You are late picking up your kid from school and try to explain
                                      to the teacher you were stuck in Web traffic.

                                      /// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\
                                      /// Creator of Vim - Vi IMproved -- http://www.Vim.org \\\
                                      \\\ Project leader for A-A-P -- http://www.A-A-P.org ///
                                      \\\ Help AIDS victims, buy here: http://ICCF-Holland.org/click1.html ///
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.