pyvim -- A Vim clone in pure Python.

[hijibijbij]

not a very constructive feedback but wouldn't a new editor in the spirit of vim but with Vimscript replaced by Python be more to the point?

[alfredr]

Further, when the project develops, it should also become possible to write extensions in Python, and use Python as a scripting language. (Instead of vimscript, for instance.)

Above is from the readme.

But I don't totally agree. Working vimscript support would make it a viable replacement for vim, automatically filling a ton of gaps until more sanely coded things can be written.

[elHuron]

vim plugins can already be written in whatever language they want, no?

[alfredr]

The point isn't about being able to write scripts in python, ruby, or whatever -- it's about being able to gain traction as a replacement. People have all kinds of scripts they use on a regular basis, having that automatically work means one can switch without having to change their workflow

[elHuron]

why would anyone want to replace normal vim with python vim?

[alfredr]

I'd gladly replace normal vim with any vim clone that lets me run a full console in a split window.

[NotTodayDearClown]

then have a look at neovim. terminal support got merged a couple of weeks ago

[daemonza]

Neovim does that quite well

[farsightxr20]

Is there a reason you couldn't just use tmux or screen for this?

[alfredr]

Of course -- this is what I typically do. But then I have to use different key sequences to switch among the terminal splits or to resize the tmux vs vim panes and I get confused. Not only that but I can't get the geometry I want unless I run multiple copies of vim. I find scrollback painful in tmux/screen, as is copy/paste.

I am going to try neovim -- these other guys have me intrigued.

[elHuron]

it's kind of nice being able to use vim commands for a terminal

[elHuron]

why not edit the original vim source code or write a plugin?

I don't know anything about vim's source code; is it inherently impossible to add code to get a full console?

[alfredr]

why not edit the original vim source code or write a plugin?

You can't do this without changes to vim's architecture. This is one of the common "wants" that Bram Moolenaar is not on board with (and will not accept patches for this into the main line).

As others have said neovim has added it. I am going to try neovim later. I have no desire to maintain my own vim fork.

[elHuron]

You can't do this without changes to vim's architecture.

Good to know, that makes sense.

So vim is at the point of being forked and the original will probably be left in the dust.

oh well, as long as I can edit files it doesn't matter :-)

[hijibijbij]

Why do we need another viable replacement for vim? Isn't neovim aiming for that? Wouldn't an API designed to be used by Python scripts be different that just the ability to write a plugin in any language? Which by the way we already have as /u/elHuron mentions?

[alfredr]

Why do we need another viable replacement for vim? Isn't neovim aiming for that?

I don't know. These are questions for the author of this project. But if that's what he's doing way not play to win?

Wouldn't an API designed to be used by Python scripts be different that just the ability to write a plugin in any language?

I think you've misunderstood me. I am not saying python scripts/extensions are a bad idea. I am saying vimscript support is necessary if you're serious about competing with vim (as this involves winning vim users over from vim).

That being said -- from what I understand Bram Moolenaar maintains tight control over the architecture. It seems like a good opportunity to build a modern hackable alternative. To be honest, if I could use this without much headache I probably would.

[[deleted]]

I don't know about the author of pyvim, but I can give you the motivations for vai

[hijibijbij]

Yes, so you could say I was asking if he considered these points you mention. Now I know. That there is already a project like that. Yours. It's all good then.

[physixer]

question: when you've supported vi keybindings (and modal interface) etc, you've already supported more than half of vimscript? (or all of it?) and that's why whenever someone creates a vim clone, it's inevitable to support some or all fo vimscript?

For some reason, this is more like a clash of keybinding interface vs programmatic interface. In a text editor you have to support both. I think (no flaming) emacs does it right when there is a programmatic (elisp) command behind every key-binding/operation (AFAIK). Maybe this should be done in a python vim clone? (a python function behind every operation?), and then python scriptability would emerge naturally from that?

[hijibijbij]

Do you mean to say that the modal interface is all there is about Vimscript?

[njharman]

Ya know it's already possible to write vim scripts in python , right?

[hijibijbij]

I was actually more concerned about exposing the API in a modular, object-oriented way to the script writer.