26123Re: script bloat
- Nov 2, 2001Aric Blumer wrote:
> On Fri Nov 2 11:52:21 2001 Dan Sharp wrote:It's already possible to load functions on demand. It doesn't make much
> > [discussion of using FuncUndefined event to load a function snipped]
> I think we agree that there is a means to load functions from a
> "library", so what we need now is a set of standard functions that all
> Vim distributions contain (similar to standard plugins).
> We know there's one on the list already:
> (BTW, Bram, do you think this is a good idea? feasible?)
sense to add a library of functions to the distribution, implementing
them in C would be much better for speed (and probably for size as
well). Only advantage of the script is that it doesn't occupy memory
when it's not used. But is that important these days?
It might help a bit if we have a standard directory to put the functions
into. Remaining problem is the naming. That's where we always got
stuck in the past.
BEDEVERE: And what do you burn, apart from witches?
FOURTH VILLAGER: ... Wood?
BEDEVERE: So why do witches burn?
SECOND VILLAGER: (pianissimo) ... Because they're made of wood...?
"Monty Python and the Holy Grail" PYTHON (MONTY) PICTURES LTD
/// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.moolenaar.net \\\
((( Creator of Vim -- http://vim.sf.net -- ftp://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim )))
\\\ Help me helping AIDS orphans in Uganda - http://iccf-holland.org ///
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>