From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 24 17:45:19 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09EA0106566B for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:45:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kline@thought.org) Received: from thought.org (plato.thought.org [209.180.213.209]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C47578FC16 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:45:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by thought.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 889A0E8040D; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:45:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 10:45:15 -0700 From: Gary Kline To: Zhihao Yuan Message-ID: <20110324174515.GA15209@thought.org> References: <86mxkm1erm.fsf@gmail.com> <86aaglx1ow.fsf@gmail.com> <20110324111118.GF65750@cicely7.cicely.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Organization: Thought Unlimited. Public service Unix since 1986. X-Of_Interest: With 24 years of service to the Unix community. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Cc: Arnaud Lacombe , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Bernd Walter , ticso@cicely.de, Pan Tsu Subject: Re: [GSoC] About the idea: Unicode support in vi X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:45:19 -0000 On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 06:49:24AM -0500, Zhihao Yuan wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Bernd Walter wrote: > > > > Let clean up the my points: > 1. ex-vi is POSIX vi compatible, and it supports mbyte encodings. But > there are lots of work need to be done if we want to use it to replace > the current nvi in the base system; > 2. nvi does not use iconv, nvi-m17n only supports limited non-Unicode > mbyte encodings, nvi-devel has too many problems. So we don't have a > nvi which comes with fully mbyte enconding support; > 3. Since other textproc tools, even include ed, support mbyte > encodings, we do need a improved nvi; > 4. Maybe compared with other kernel related GSoC proposals, this one > seems to be easier. But on the other hand, the goal is useful, and the > scale of the goal gives it more chance to become really useful. > > It that reasonable? > > -- > Zhihao Yuan > The best way to predict the future is to invent it. it makes sense to upgrade nvi rather that ex-vi ... for reasons prev'ly mentioned. talking about space/memory and even processor speed seems like a non-issue. i would like to be able to be editing a file with vim [[ for WHATEVER reason ]] and pick up or resume editing the same file with nvi. Of course there are dozens of alley-ways and twists and turns we all can get into is arguing this-and-that about the fine-grained details. It boils down to an issue of usefulness-- as i see it. be nice to have a "feature for feature, bug for bug" clone of vi that nvi used to claim to be. again: have nvi and vim be interchangable. oh: and then give the new nvi to the linux guys and let then deal with any port or build issues. > -- Gary Kline kline@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix Journey Toward the Dawn, E-Book: http://www.thought.org The 7.98a release of Jottings: http://jottings.thought.org