
Vim 7.3.1000 - tksohishi
http://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim/patches/7.3/7.3.1000
======
tsm
I guess I should be thankful 98% of my programming life is in higher-level
languages than C, but...am I the only one whose terrified of the magic
numbers? In _hex_? Can anyone provide context about what's so special about
0xfb20 and 0xfb4f?

~~~
goldfeld
All my programming life has been in higher-level languages, yet with Rust I'm
being inexplicably drawn to down and dirty systems programming. It's cool to
finally be able to use :make and all the C-oriented things like [i and ]i,
ctags and the like. It's interesting seeing how much 'dogfooding' vim has in
that tons of stuff are undoubtedly geared towards his own needs developing vim
(and C applications in general.) Pretty much how I work with coding products,
I work my best when I'm the use case, and great open source products like
vi/vim and emacs excel in that legions of people share the creator's use case
(and well, configurability right down to the bone.) I've found that a non-
trivial amount of people do share the use case for the first project I've
launched[1], I only hope for it to hold true for my most ambitious ones in the
working.

I don't know Bram, but I can't help but wonder why such a distinguished open
source figure has ultimately ended up working for Google. Maybe he enjoys the
access to resources. I wish donations could still support him directly rather
than his idea of aid (well it does seem to have a bend towards education at
least). I wish he wouldn't need a day job and could yet breed other new and
great contributions to the world. I don't feel particularly endeared towards
Google, despite all the collateral good it has done while doing a lot of evil
(i.e. something to do with the looming ad empire strengthening big
corporations.)

[1]: <https://github.com/goldfeld/vim-seek>

~~~
gbog
I use ctags with Python, PHP and I'm sure it will works with most other
languages invented.

------
willlll
Here's to another 1000 commits for the world's best text editor. Cheers!

~~~
brianpgordon
Sublime Text is on its 1000th commit?

~~~
bwilliams
You spelled Vim wrong.

------
mhi
NOTE: If you experience troubles with more complicated regular expressions in
the next time, it might be because of the new engine.

:h two-engines

:h 're'

~~~
rbonvall
Doc link for those of us that don't have a recent enough version of Vim:
[http://code.google.com/p/vim/source/browse/runtime/doc/patte...](http://code.google.com/p/vim/source/browse/runtime/doc/pattern.txt#353)

------
jng
Pretty ugly bug. Where did it happen? Anyway, congrats & long life!

~~~
jlgreco
Apparently this is in the code that decomposes strings so that they can be
compared (necessary with Hebrew and Arabic seemingly?).

This is an interesting snippet from that code...:

    
    
            /* decompose the character if necessary, into 'base' characters
            * because I don't care about Arabic, I will hard-code the Hebrew
            * which I *do* care about! So sue me... */
            if (c1 != c2 && (!ireg_ic || utf_fold(c1) != utf_fold(c2)))
            {
                /* decomposition necessary? */
                mb_decompose(c1, &c11, &junk, &junk);
                mb_decompose(c2, &c12, &junk, &junk);
                c1 = c11;
                c2 = c12;
                if (c11 != c12 && (!ireg_ic || utf_fold(c11) != utf_fold(c12)))
                    break;
            }
    

Apparently string comparison is harder than I previously thought.

~~~
plorkyeran
String comparison with Unicode is pretty astonishingly complex, partially
because equality is not as well defined as it seems to be on the surface.
Should e and é be equal? If you're dealing with user input from people who are
unlikely to know how to type é, then they probably should, but in many cases
they shouldn't. A more complex case is é and é (precomposed vs decomposed
forms), which nearly always should be equal, but a simple byte comparison will
say they're different.

Fortunately, there are ICU bindings for every non-toy language which solves
these sorts of problems for you (although ICU has the drawback of being
absolutely huge).

~~~
jlgreco
There are a lot of things I have seen in Unicode that seem like they should
not exist in the first place. _MATHEMATICAL [BOLD|SANS-SERIF|DOUBLE-
STRUCK|MONOSPACE] DIGIT_ for example... I guess those things potentially carry
significant meaning in some mathematics texts though.

I guess the ICU stuff probably gives you an strtol equivalent that can handle
that sort of stuff.

~~~
chris_wot
The LibreOffice guys have told me hat ICU has security concerns and is, for
all intents and purposes, no longer being developed. They are switching to
another engine (hard buzz? Name escapes me).

Anyone know if this is true?

~~~
lucian1900
Harfbuzz [1] is for text shaping/layout, not unicode support.

1\. <http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/HarfBuzz/>

~~~
chris_wot
Drat it. iPad "corrected" my spelling and I didn't notice.

------
AutocorrectThis
The raw power that you feel in your hand when using VIM is amazing, I never
get that feeling with Emacs, but each to their own. Not needing to reach for
the arrow keys, backspace etc. is neat too.

~~~
tincholio
I think the raw _editing_ power of Vim is, as you say, probably unmatched in
Emacs. Vim, however, cannot hold a candle to all the rest of Emacs and its
elisp-y goodness. I'm a long-time Emacs user, and having recognized that Vim's
modal editing and "language" are a better way of editing, opted for using
Evil-mode, which gives you the best of both worlds. The transition was not
without pain, but it was overall quick and worthy.

~~~
pekk
elisp is not such a great language, so the value of editing using a pile of it
is mixed. It boils down to a matter of taste. If you like elisp, it's a big
win and if you don't, it's a deal-breaker.

~~~
swah
It is a great language when run inside Emacs for doing Emacs stuff. Elisp is
orders of magnitude more powerful than Vimscript on Vim. Its easy to see by
the best things each community has produced on their editors.

Disclaimer: I love all 3 editors for they all have great ideas.

------
ececconi
Best editor

------
lucb1e
I'm not sure I understand the point here. Why is this on Hackernews?

~~~
lucb1e
Seriously, do I have to get downvoted 5x (by >750 karma users) for not
understanding something that is apparently obvious to everyone else? I'm
genuinely not getting it.

~~~
chrismorgan
This is the first time Vim's patch level has gone over 999; matter of fact,
Bram expressed some concern about it. The patch level has hitherto been
expressed as three digits (e.g. 7.3.052).

Some information is available in the "Plans for Vim 7.4" thread in the vim_dev
group:
[https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/vim_dev/Z...](https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/vim_dev/ZWWgK9aXQ2Y)

~~~
lucb1e
Ah okay, thanks for explaining :)

