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

Re: The list on vim-patches page

Expand Messages
  • Tony Mechelynck
    On 16/12/09 17:12, Tom Link wrote: [...] ... OK, so let s add a user s report. The only patch I use from that vim-dev list of semi-official patches is Bill
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 31, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      On 16/12/09 17:12, Tom Link wrote:
      [...]
      > Anyway, there seems to be no way to report success/failures with
      > certain patches in a systematic manner that would allow Bram to get an
      > adequate overview of how many people use a certain patch with which
      > version (incl patch level) of vim and how many of those people
      > experience problems that can be reproduced so that we know for sure
      > that the problem is actually caused by the patch etc. Otherwise the
      > patch authors (I didn't contribute a patch so this is just another
      > "personal theory") probably get frustrated, they abandon vim, they
      > stop maintaining their patches with the consequence that their patches
      > are likely to quickly become unusable since the development of vim
      > continues.
      >
      > Regards,
      > Tom
      >

      OK, so let's add a user's report.

      The only patch I use from that vim-dev list of semi-official patches is
      Bill McCarthy's "extra float functions" patch. I've been using it
      constantly in Huge Vim builds with GTK2/Gnome2 GUI ever since it was
      published (which was more than a year ago) and I've had exactly zero
      problems with it in all that time. Of course patches to eval.c apply
      with a line-offset but that's strictly all. I believe it would be a
      valuable addition to Vim (versions with +float, of course -- all this
      patch's code is bracketed by #ifdef FEAT_FLOAT). This patch integrates
      so "naturally" with Vim that when I use a float function in an :echo
      statement (usually :echo printf(...)) at the command-line, I don't know
      (unless I look into the help, of course) whether it's from Bill's set of
      float functions, or from Bram's.

      Also, if anyone has had any problems at all with this float-functions
      patch, I haven't noticed any mention of it on the list.


      P.S. Bill: a missing #ifdef FEAT_FLOAT around the lines concerning tan()
      and tanh() at line 7807-after of eval.c 7.2.350 (line 7664-before /
      7690-after at the time the patch was written) seems to imply that this
      patch wouldn't compile in a build with +eval but -float. I don't see the
      problem since "my" builds are either Huge (+eval +float) or Tiny (-eval).

      It may seem weird to include a "floating-point patch" in a build
      compiled with -float but one might want to compile several
      differently-configured versions out of the same sources -- as I do but
      not in a way to be hurt.


      Best regards,
      Tony.
      --
      Dear Lord, observe this bended knee
      This visage meek and humble,
      And hear this confidential plea
      Voiced in reverent mumble:
      Give me Shylock, give me Fagin
      But O God spare me Ronald Reagan!
      -- Ansel Adams

      --
      You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.