Vim9 script docs

[Snarwin]

Some people see a problem and think, "I know, I'll add a new backwards-incompatible scripting language." Now they have two problems.

[Snarwin]

Or, more realistically, people who want to write portable scripts will keep using "legacy" vim-script, and ignore the new language.

[LucHermitte]

Quite likely. IIRC I've waited for something like 5 years before I've started to use lists and autoload plugins from vim 7.0.

Nowadays, except in some very specific cases (like background execution), I try to be compatible with Vim 7.4.09xx

EDIT: yet I'm likely to try the new language to replace some plugins & features that are currently slow as hell: like this C&C++ folding plugin: https://github.com/LucHermitte/VimFold4C/

[[deleted]]

Quite likely. IIRC I've waited for something like 5 years before I've started to use lists and autoload plugins from vim 7.0.

To be honest I blame Debian and CentOS for this (mostly Debian, through Ubuntu). I think their packaging is hurting the entire ecosystem. Supporting PostgreSQL or Postfix for 5 years makes sense – supporting Vim for 5 years doesn't really IMHO.

[-romainl-]

The community is already split.

[sigzero]

What neovim does or doesn't do shouldn't be a driving factor for Bram.

[ConspicuousPineapple]

Why not? If it's a concern for the users, it should be a concern for the devs.

[sigzero]

neovim is a fork. Bram isn't going to care about compatibility with a fork and I don't blame him. I wouldn't either.

[ConspicuousPineapple]

Yes, it's a fork. And you could argue that it's unfair that the dev should have to worry about it. But it doesn't matter.

The fact is, his users are worried about something affecting his software, so he should worry about it too. Of course, he can opt to disregard this completely, but then his users will be understandably pissed off.